Re: dcache shrink list corruption?

[Al Viro]

On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 06:01:39PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:

> Attached patch is just a starting point (untested).  Not sure how to minimize
> contention without adding too much complexity.

Contention isn't the worst problem here - I'd expect the cacheline ping-pong
to hurt more...  I agree with the analysis, but I'd really like to avoid that
spinlock ;-/

Let me see if we can avoid that...  Oh, well - at least that's a good excuse
to take a break from fucking deadlock analysis around the damn acct(2), most
of VFS and network filesystems ;-/
--
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/