On Mon, 2014-05-26 at 12:35 -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Thu, 22 May 2014, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
>
> > Similarly to rmap_walk_anon() and collect_procs_anon(),
> > there is opportunity to share the lock in rmap_walk_file()
> > and collect_procs_file() for file backed pages.
>
> And lots of oth
On Thu, 22 May 2014, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> Similarly to rmap_walk_anon() and collect_procs_anon(),
> there is opportunity to share the lock in rmap_walk_file()
> and collect_procs_file() for file backed pages.
And lots of other places, no? I welcome i_mmap_rwsem, but I think
you're approachin
On 05/22/2014 11:33 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> Similarly to rmap_walk_anon() and collect_procs_anon(),
> there is opportunity to share the lock in rmap_walk_file()
> and collect_procs_file() for file backed pages.
>
> Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso
Acked-by: Rik van Riel
--
All rights reve
Similarly to rmap_walk_anon() and collect_procs_anon(),
there is opportunity to share the lock in rmap_walk_file()
and collect_procs_file() for file backed pages.
Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso
---
include/linux/fs.h | 10 ++
mm/memory-failure.c | 4 ++--
mm/rmap.c | 4 ++--
Similar to commit 4fc3f1d6, which optimized the anon-vma rwsem, we can share
the i_mmap_rwsem among multiple readers for rmap_walk_file(),
try_to_unmap_file() and collect_procs_file().
With this change, and the rwsem optimizations discussed in
http://lkml.org/lkml/2013/6/16/38 we can see performan
5 matches
Mail list logo