From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 14:57:29 +0100 (CET) From: Andrea Arcangeli Subject: Re: (reiserfs) Re: RFC: Re: journal ports for 2.3? In-Reply-To: <14431.32449.832594.222614@dukat.scot.redhat.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: "Stephen C. Tweedie" Cc: Chris Mason , reiserfs@devlinux.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.rutgers.edu, linux-mm@kvack.org, Ingo Molnar , Linus Torvalds List-ID: On Tue, 21 Dec 1999, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote: >We cannot use the buffer.c dirty list anyway because bdflush can write >those buffers to disk at any time. Transactions have to control the So you are talking about replacing this line: dirty = size_buffers_type[BUF_DIRTY] >> PAGE_SHIFT; with: dirty = (size_buffers_type[BUF_DIRTY]+size_buffers_type[BUF_PINNED]) >> PAGE_SHIFT; If you don't do that you don't need _two_ filesystems to generate too many dirty buffers but you can potentially go OOM with only one journaling filesystem running. As you talked about a _two_ filesystem case generating dirty buffers on 100% of memory I thought you was talking about something very different than the above one liner. If you was talking about it that's fine and I agree of course. >We're not talking about normal filesystems. :) With "normal" filesystems I meant filesystems that are _using_ linux/fs/buffer.c. Andrea -- 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.nl.linux.org/Linux-MM/