From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 In-reply-to: <48F3765A.2010301@linux-foundation.org> (message from Christoph Lameter on Mon, 13 Oct 2008 09:24:58 -0700) Subject: Re: SLUB defrag pull request? References: <1223883004.31587.15.camel@penberg-laptop> <1223883164.31587.16.camel@penberg-laptop> <200810132354.30789.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> <48F3765A.2010301@linux-foundation.org> Message-Id: From: Miklos Szeredi Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 16:28:43 +0200 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: cl@linux-foundation.org Cc: miklos@szeredi.hu, nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, hugh@veritas.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, penberg@cs.helsinki.fi, akpm@linux-foundation.org List-ID: On Mon, 13 Oct 2008, Christoph Lameter wrote: > Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > I think it's wrong to unhash dentries while they are possibly still > > being used. You can do the shrink_dcache_parent() here, but should > > leave the unhashing to be done by prune_one_dentry(), after it's been > > checked that there are no other users of the dentry. > > > > > d_invalidate() calls shrink_dcache_parent() as needed and will fail if > there are other users of the dentry. Only if it's a directory. Now unhashing an in-use non-directory is not fatal, but you'll get things like "filename (deleted)" in /proc, and suchlike. Don't do it. Miklos -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org