On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 05:27:58PM +0800, levin li wrote: > On 05/07/2012 05:21 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > >On Sat, May 05, 2012 at 10:43:55AM +0800, levin wrote: > >>I think the deletion_work_list you mentioned is to keep the deletion work > >>runs sequentially, we can queue the next work from the list only after the > >>previous one finishes. > >Given that deletion_wqueue only has one thread it should always be > >sequential, right? > > Yes, currently there's only one thread for deletion work, > maybe it was designed to adapt more thread for the need of > future, I think this question can be answered by Kazutaka. I've been looking at the delete code a bit more and I understand it even less now. Why does can't delete_one simply loop over all VDIs in one go? Are there any fairness issues with multiple deletions? |