Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 13:14:47 +0100 (BST) From: Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@dk.tfs.com> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: vnode->v_usage Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95q.970502131159.331E-100000@herring.nlsystems.com> In-Reply-To: <5321.862569821@critter>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 2 May 1997, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > >I don't have any performance numbers but it seems to work fine. I think > >the cache should just call vtouch for all vnodes and not check the usage > >count. > OK. > > >Also vtouch should take the v_interlock simple_lock before reading > >the v_usecount field as specified by vnode.h. > > Ok, now I'm in doubt here... Which of these two places are the > correct place to release the interlock, I've marked the candidates > with XXX, I pressume the later, right ? I think that you don't need the v_interlock for using v_freelist so probably releasing it earlier is better. Maybe something like: int usecount; simple_lock(&vp->v_interlock); usecount = vp->v_usecount; simple_unlock(&vp->v_interlock); if (usecount) ... ... -- Doug Rabson Mail: dfr@nlsystems.com Nonlinear Systems Ltd. Phone: +44 181 951 1891
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95q.970502131159.331E-100000>