On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 05:09:21PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-09-01 at 01:05 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
>
> > > Trouble is, we'd like to have a sane upper bound on the amount of held
> > > locks at any one time, obviously this is just wanting, because a lot of
> > > lock chains
On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 05:09:21PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-09-01 at 01:05 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
>
> > > Trouble is, we'd like to have a sane upper bound on the amount of held
> > > locks at any one time, obviously this is just wanting, because a lot of
> > > lock chains
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-09-01 at 01:05 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
>
>>> Trouble is, we'd like to have a sane upper bound on the amount of held
>>> locks at any one time, obviously this is just wanting, because a lot of
>>> lock chains also depend on the number of online cpus...
>>
On Sat, 2007-09-01 at 01:05 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> > Trouble is, we'd like to have a sane upper bound on the amount of held
> > locks at any one time, obviously this is just wanting, because a lot of
> > lock chains also depend on the number of online cpus...
>
> Sure - this is an obvious
On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 04:33:51PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-08-31 at 23:50 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 08:39:49AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 23:43 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> > > > The xfs filesystem can exceed the
On Fri, 2007-08-31 at 09:33 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> Peter, unless there is some other reason to do so, changing xfs
> performance behavior simply to satisfy lockdep limitations* doesn't seem
> like the best plan.
>
> I suppose one slightly flakey option would be for xfs to see whether
>
David Chinner wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 08:39:49AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 23:43 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>>> The xfs filesystem can exceed the current lockdep
>>> MAX_LOCK_DEPTH, because when deleting an entire cluster of inodes,
>>> they all get locked in
On Fri, 2007-08-31 at 23:50 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 08:39:49AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 23:43 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> > > The xfs filesystem can exceed the current lockdep
> > > MAX_LOCK_DEPTH, because when deleting an entire
On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 08:39:49AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 23:43 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> > The xfs filesystem can exceed the current lockdep
> > MAX_LOCK_DEPTH, because when deleting an entire cluster of inodes,
> > they all get locked in xfs_ifree_cluster().
On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 23:43 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> The xfs filesystem can exceed the current lockdep
> MAX_LOCK_DEPTH, because when deleting an entire cluster of inodes,
> they all get locked in xfs_ifree_cluster(). The normal cluster
> size is 8192 bytes, and with the default (and
David Chinner wrote:
On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 08:39:49AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 23:43 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
The xfs filesystem can exceed the current lockdep
MAX_LOCK_DEPTH, because when deleting an entire cluster of inodes,
they all get locked in
On Fri, 2007-08-31 at 23:50 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 08:39:49AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 23:43 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
The xfs filesystem can exceed the current lockdep
MAX_LOCK_DEPTH, because when deleting an entire cluster of
On Fri, 2007-08-31 at 09:33 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
Peter, unless there is some other reason to do so, changing xfs
performance behavior simply to satisfy lockdep limitations* doesn't seem
like the best plan.
I suppose one slightly flakey option would be for xfs to see whether
lockdep
On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 04:33:51PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Fri, 2007-08-31 at 23:50 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 08:39:49AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 23:43 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
The xfs filesystem can exceed the current lockdep
On Sat, 2007-09-01 at 01:05 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
Trouble is, we'd like to have a sane upper bound on the amount of held
locks at any one time, obviously this is just wanting, because a lot of
lock chains also depend on the number of online cpus...
Sure - this is an obvious case
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Sat, 2007-09-01 at 01:05 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
Trouble is, we'd like to have a sane upper bound on the amount of held
locks at any one time, obviously this is just wanting, because a lot of
lock chains also depend on the number of online cpus...
Sure - this is
On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 05:09:21PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Sat, 2007-09-01 at 01:05 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
Trouble is, we'd like to have a sane upper bound on the amount of held
locks at any one time, obviously this is just wanting, because a lot of
lock chains also depend
On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 05:09:21PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Sat, 2007-09-01 at 01:05 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
Trouble is, we'd like to have a sane upper bound on the amount of held
locks at any one time, obviously this is just wanting, because a lot of
lock chains also depend
On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 23:43 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
The xfs filesystem can exceed the current lockdep
MAX_LOCK_DEPTH, because when deleting an entire cluster of inodes,
they all get locked in xfs_ifree_cluster(). The normal cluster
size is 8192 bytes, and with the default (and minimum)
On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 08:39:49AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 23:43 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
The xfs filesystem can exceed the current lockdep
MAX_LOCK_DEPTH, because when deleting an entire cluster of inodes,
they all get locked in xfs_ifree_cluster(). The
The xfs filesystem can exceed the current lockdep
MAX_LOCK_DEPTH, because when deleting an entire cluster of inodes,
they all get locked in xfs_ifree_cluster(). The normal cluster
size is 8192 bytes, and with the default (and minimum) inode size
of 256 bytes, that's up to 32 inodes that get
The xfs filesystem can exceed the current lockdep
MAX_LOCK_DEPTH, because when deleting an entire cluster of inodes,
they all get locked in xfs_ifree_cluster(). The normal cluster
size is 8192 bytes, and with the default (and minimum) inode size
of 256 bytes, that's up to 32 inodes that get
22 matches
Mail list logo
