On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 06:06:02PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Mon 24-06-13 10:07:49, Jan Kara wrote:
> > It is very likely that block device inode will be part of BDI dirty list
> > as well. However it doesn't make sence to sort inodes on the b_io list
> > just because of this inode (as it
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 06:06:02PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
On Mon 24-06-13 10:07:49, Jan Kara wrote:
It is very likely that block device inode will be part of BDI dirty list
as well. However it doesn't make sence to sort inodes on the b_io list
just because of this inode (as it contains
On Mon 24-06-13 10:07:49, Jan Kara wrote:
> It is very likely that block device inode will be part of BDI dirty list
> as well. However it doesn't make sence to sort inodes on the b_io list
> just because of this inode (as it contains buffers all over the device
> anyway). So save some CPU cycles
On Mon 24-06-13 10:07:49, Jan Kara wrote:
It is very likely that block device inode will be part of BDI dirty list
as well. However it doesn't make sence to sort inodes on the b_io list
just because of this inode (as it contains buffers all over the device
anyway). So save some CPU cycles
It is very likely that block device inode will be part of BDI dirty list
as well. However it doesn't make sence to sort inodes on the b_io list
just because of this inode (as it contains buffers all over the device
anyway). So save some CPU cycles which is valuable since we hold relatively
It is very likely that block device inode will be part of BDI dirty list
as well. However it doesn't make sence to sort inodes on the b_io list
just because of this inode (as it contains buffers all over the device
anyway). So save some CPU cycles which is valuable since we hold relatively
6 matches
Mail list logo
