Re: [PATCH v2] fs/ext4: increase parallelism in updating ext4 orphan list

[Thavatchai Makphaibulchoke]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.On 04/15/2014 11:25 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
>   I have checked the source and I didn't find many places where i_mutex was
> not held. But maybe I'm wrong. That's why I wanted to see the patch where
> you are using i_mutex instead of hashed mutexes and which didn't perform
> good enough.
> 

I've attached two patches.  The first one, 0001-Orphan-patch-using-i_mutex-and-removing-s_orphan_loc.patch, is the one you requested, using i_mutex and removing the s_orphan_lock.  The second one, 0001-Adding-code-to-collect-i_mutex-usage-during-orphan.patch, with the code to collect statistics on the number of orphan operations with and without holding i_mutex, in case you are also interested, can be applied on top of the first patch.

Please note that these two patches is meant for data collection only, as the code is quite of submittal quality.

Please also let me know if you have any further comments or suggestion.  I'll hold submitting for a couple more days.


> 
> 								Honza
>

Thanks,
Mak.