Re: [PATCH 0/6] writeback: moving expire targets forbackground/kupdate works

[Wu Fengguang]

Hi Christoph,

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 12:34:50PM +0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Hi Wu,
> 
> if you're queueing up writeback changes can you look into splitting
> inode_wb_list_lock as it was done in earlier versions of the inode
> scalability patches?  Especially if we don't get the I/O less
> balance_dirty_pages in ASAP it'll at least allows us to scale the
> busy waiting for the list manipulationes to one CPU per BDI.

Do you mean to split inode_wb_list_lock into struct bdi_writeback? 
So as to improve at least the JBOD case now and hopefully benefit the
1-bdi case when switching to multiple bdi_writeback per bdi in future?

I've not touched any locking code before, but it looks like some dumb
code replacement. Let me try it :)

Thanks,
Fengguang
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/