Re: [PATCH RFC] btrfs: introduce a separate mutex for caching_block_groups list

Hi Liu, On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Liu Bo wrote: > On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 07:18:59PM +0200, Alex Lyakas wrote: >> We have a commit_root_sem, which is a read-write semaphore that protects the >> commit roots. >> But it is also used to protect the list of caching block

Re: [PATCH RFC] btrfs: introduce a separate mutex for caching_block_groups list

On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 07:18:59PM +0200, Alex Lyakas wrote: > We have a commit_root_sem, which is a read-write semaphore that protects the > commit roots. > But it is also used to protect the list of caching block groups. > > As a result, while doing "slow" caching, the following issue is seen:

Re: [PATCH RFC] btrfs: introduce a separate mutex for caching_block_groups list

This sounds reasonable to me, I'll look at it more when I'm on the ground and can look at the code and see for sure. Thanks, Josef Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 19, 2017, at 1:19 PM, Alex Lyakas wrote: > > We have a commit_root_sem, which is a read-write semaphore

[PATCH RFC] btrfs: introduce a separate mutex for caching_block_groups list

We have a commit_root_sem, which is a read-write semaphore that protects the commit roots. But it is also used to protect the list of caching block groups. As a result, while doing "slow" caching, the following issue is seen: Some of the caching threads are scanning the extent tree with