Minki/linux
1
0
Fork 1
mirror of https://github.com/torvalds/linux.git synced 2024-11-18 18:11:56 +00:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

fs: Don't need to put list_lru into its own cacheline

Browse Source 
The list_lru structure is essentially just a pointer to a table of
per-node LRU lists.  Even if CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM is defined, the list
field is just used for LRU list registration and shrinker_id is set at
initialization.  Those fields won't need to be touched that often.

So there is no point to make the list_lru structures to sit in their own
cachelines.

Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
This commit is contained in:
Waiman Long 2019-01-30 13:52:37 -05:00 committed by Linus Torvalds
parent 1dbd449c99
commit 7d10f70fc1
1 changed files with 5 additions and 4 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

9
include/linux/fs.h
View File

@ -1479,11 +1479,12 @@ struct super_block {
struct user_namespace *s_user_ns;
/*
* Keep the lru lists last in the structure so they always sit on their
* own individual cachelines.
* The list_lru structure is essentially just a pointer to a table
* of per-node lru lists, each of which has its own spinlock.
* There is no need to put them into separate cachelines.
*/
struct list_lru s_dentry_lru ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp;
struct list_lru s_inode_lru ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp;
struct list_lru s_dentry_lru;
struct list_lru s_inode_lru;
struct rcu_head rcu;
struct work_struct destroy_work;