> Hello!
>
> > net/socket.c:sock_alloc() says that get_empty_inode() is not SMP-safe and
> > calls the inode_lock spinlock "decorative". Why? If the big deal is teh
> > static last_ino then it is trivial to fix:
>
> The access to last_ino is serialized by spin lock, so that
> it is allowed to be not-atomic.
>
> Real bug is inside grow_inodes(), which calls prune_dcache() in turn.
> And nobody took care of poor dcache in 2.3, so that it stands now
> as bone in throat and all similar operations require big kernel lock.
There are several big nasties that block dcache threading. Yet.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/