On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 04:00:45PM -0700, Khazhismel Kumykov wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Khazhismel Kumykov wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 11:20 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> >> The thing is, unlike shrink_dcache_parent() we *can* bugger off as
> >> soon as we'd found no victims, nothing
On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Khazhismel Kumykov wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 11:20 PM, Al Viro wrote:
>> The thing is, unlike shrink_dcache_parent() we *can* bugger off as
>> soon as we'd found no victims, nothing mounted and dentry itself
>> is unhashed. We can't do anything in select_co
On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 11:20 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> The thing is, unlike shrink_dcache_parent() we *can* bugger off as
> soon as we'd found no victims, nothing mounted and dentry itself
> is unhashed. We can't do anything in select_collect() (we would've
> broken shrink_dcache_parent() that way), b
On Fri, Jun 02, 2017 at 10:22:39PM -0700, Khazhismel Kumykov wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 6:12 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> > Part of that could be relieved if we turned check_and_drop() into
> > static void check_and_drop(void *_data)
> > {
> > struct detach_data *data = _data;
> >
> >
On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 6:12 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> Part of that could be relieved if we turned check_and_drop() into
> static void check_and_drop(void *_data)
> {
> struct detach_data *data = _data;
>
> if (!data->mountpoint && list_empty(&data->select.dispose))
> __d
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 02:58:11PM -0700, Khazhismel Kumykov wrote:
> Once the dentry is on a shrink list would
> it be unreachable anyways,
Why would it be? Suppose e.g. shrink_dcache_parent() finds a dentry with
zero refcount; to the shrink list it goes, right? Then, before we actually
get ar
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 11:18 AM, Khazhismel Kumykov wrote:
> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 2:58 PM Khazhismel Kumykov wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 5:05 PM, Khazhismel Kumykov
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I'm seeing behavior in d_invalidate, if multiple threads call d_invalidate
>> > on
>> >
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 2:58 PM Khazhismel Kumykov wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 5:05 PM, Khazhismel Kumykov wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm seeing behavior in d_invalidate, if multiple threads call d_invalidate
> > on
> > the same tree at the same, behavior time blows up and all the calls hang
On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 5:05 PM, Khazhismel Kumykov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm seeing behavior in d_invalidate, if multiple threads call d_invalidate on
> the same tree at the same, behavior time blows up and all the calls hang with
> large enough trees/enough simultaneous callers. (e.g. a directory w/
9 matches
Mail list logo
