2012/9/13, OGAWA Hirofumi <hirof...@mail.parknet.co.jp>: > "J. Bruce Fields" <bfie...@fieldses.org> writes: > >>> >> Grepping around... Documentation/sysctl/vm.txt mentions a >>> >> vfs_cache_pressure parameter. >>> >> Yeah. And dirty hack will be possible to adjust sb->s_shrink.batch. >>> > I am worrying if it could lead to OOM condition on embedded >>> > system(short memory(DRAM) and support 3TB HDD disk of big size.) >>> > >>> > Please let me know if any issues or queries. >>> >>> So, now I think stable inode number may be useful if there are users of >>> it. And I guess those functionality is no collisions with -mm. And I >>> suppose we can add two modes for "nfs" option (e.g. nfs=1 and nfs=2). >>> >>> If nfs=1, works like current -mm without no limited operations. >> >> Apologies, I haven't been following the conversation carefully: remind >> me what "works like current -mm" means? > > Current -mm means the best-effort work only if inode cache is not > evicted. I.e. if there is no inode cache anymore on server, server > would return ESTALE. So I guess the behavior would not be stable > relatively. Hi OGAWA. Sorry for late response. Okay, I will resend patchset include your suggeston.(-o nfs=2) Do you mind adding busy list patch to avoid unlink issue ? And in case of rename, FAT retrun EBUSY while opening file. We can limit only rename. Let me know your opinion.
Thanks OGAWA! > > Thanks. > >>> If nfs=2, try to make stable FH and limit some operations >>> >>> (option name doesn't matter here.) >>> >>> Does this work fine? > -- > OGAWA Hirofumi <hirof...@mail.parknet.co.jp> > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
