Re: Linux 2.6.35

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Christoph Hellwig
Date: Monday, August 2, 2010 - 2:05 am

On Mon, Aug 02, 2010 at 04:24:28AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

From a quick look it seems like the inode_lock splitup can easily
be moved forward, and it would help us with doing some work on the
writeback side.  The problem is that it would need rebasing ontop
of both the vfs and writeback (aka block) trees.

--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Linux 2.6.35, Linus Torvalds, (Sun Aug 1, 4:52 pm)
Re: Linux 2.6.35, Stephen Rothwell, (Sun Aug 1, 5:32 pm)
Re: Linux 2.6.35, Dave Chinner, (Sun Aug 1, 7:33 pm)
Re: Linux 2.6.35, Linus Torvalds, (Sun Aug 1, 7:50 pm)
Re: Linux 2.6.35, Dave Chinner, (Sun Aug 1, 10:58 pm)
Re: Linux 2.6.35, Nick Piggin, (Mon Aug 2, 12:55 am)
Re: Linux 2.6.35, Nick Piggin, (Mon Aug 2, 1:14 am)
Re: Linux 2.6.35, Christoph Hellwig, (Mon Aug 2, 1:24 am)
Re: Linux 2.6.35, KOSAKI Motohiro, (Mon Aug 2, 1:46 am)
Re: Linux 2.6.35, Stephen Rothwell, (Mon Aug 2, 1:52 am)
Re: Linux 2.6.35, Christoph Hellwig, (Mon Aug 2, 2:05 am)
Re: Linux 2.6.35, Nick Piggin, (Mon Aug 2, 2:51 am)
Re: Linux 2.6.35, Nick Piggin, (Mon Aug 2, 3:07 am)
Re: Linux 2.6.35, Andi Kleen, (Tue Aug 3, 1:18 am)
Re: Linux 2.6.35, Nick Piggin, (Tue Aug 3, 2:28 am)
Re: Linux 2.6.35, Andi Kleen, (Tue Aug 3, 2:49 am)
Re: Linux 2.6.35, Henrique de Moraes H ..., (Tue Aug 3, 8:05 am)