| To: | Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH 2/2] xfs: kick inode writeback when low on memory |
| From: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 11 Apr 2011 14:36:53 -0400 |
| Cc: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <1302157196-1988-3-git-send-email-david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <1302157196-1988-1-git-send-email-david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1302157196-1988-3-git-send-email-david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
How do you produce so many atime-dirty inodes? With relatime we should have cut down on the requirement for those a lot. Do you have traces that show if we're kicking off additional data writeback this way too, or just pushing timestamp updates into the AIL? Either way the actual patch looks good, Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH 1/2] bdi: mark the bdi flusher busy when being forked, Christoph Hellwig |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [xfs-masters] [PATCH] xfs_destroy_workqueues() should not be tagged with __exit, Christoph Hellwig |
| Previous by Thread: | [PATCH 2/2] xfs: kick inode writeback when low on memory, Dave Chinner |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 2/2] xfs: kick inode writeback when low on memory, Dave Chinner |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |