OpenVZ Forum


Home » Mailing lists » Devel » [Q] missing unused dentry in prune_dcache()?
Re: [PATCH 2.6.19-rc3] VFS: per-sb dentry lru list [message #7914 is a reply to message #7910] Mon, 30 October 2006 15:08 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Eric Dumazet is currently offline  Eric Dumazet
Messages: 36
Registered: July 2006
Member
On Monday 30 October 2006 15:24, Vasily Averin wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 18:05:50 +0400
> >
> > Vasily Averin <vvs@sw.ru> wrote:
> >> Virtuozzo/OpenVZ linux kernel team has discovered that umount/remount
> >> can last for hours looping in shrink_dcache_sb() without much successes.
> >> Since during shrinking s_umount semaphore is taken lots of other
> >> unrelated operations like sync can stop working until shrink finished.
> >
> > Did you consider altering shrink_dcache_sb() so that it holds onto
> > dcache_lock and moves all the to-be-pruned dentries onto a private list
> > in a single pass, then prunes them all outside the lock?
>
> At the first glance it is wrong because of 2 reasons:
> 1) it continues to check the whole global LRU list (we propose to use
> per-sb LRU, it will provide very quick search)

Quick search maybe, but your patch adds 2 pointers to each dentry in the
system... That's pretty expensive, as dentries are already using a *lot* of
ram.

Maybe an alternative would be to not have anymore a global dentry_unused, but
only per-sb unused dentries lists ?


> 2) we have not any guarantee that someone will add new unused dentries to
> the list when we prune it outside the lock. And to the contrary, some of
> unused dentries can be used again. As far as I understand we should hold
> dcache_lock beginning at the removing dentry from unused_list until
> dentry_iput() call.
>
> David did it inside shrink_dcache_for_umount() just because it have
> guarantee that all the filesystem operations are finished and new ones
> cannot be started.
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: [PATCH]: OOM can panic due to processes stuck in __alloc_pages()
Next Topic: [PATCH] move_task_off_dead_cpu() should be called with disabled ints
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sun Aug 24 07:37:01 GMT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.05684 seconds