On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 7:44 PM, Maxim V. Patlasov <mpatla...@parallels.com> wrote: > I'm for accounting NR_WRITEBACK_TEMP because balance_dirty_pages is already > overcomplicated (imho) and adding new clauses for FUSE makes me sick.
Agreed. But instead of further complexifying balance_dirty_pages() fuse specific throttling can be done in fuse_page_mkwrite(), I think. And at that point NR_WRITEBACK_TEMP really becomes irrelevant to the dirty balancing logic. Thanks, Miklos -- 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/
