On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 05:36:06AM +1200, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 9:24 PM Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > What has happened to this pull request? It may be too late for this to be > > merged now but I'd like to understand why it was not merged or rejected... > > Sorry, initially I left if for later consideration after rc1, and then > I just forgot about it. > > I didn't see much point to the cleanup when it actually adds lots of > lines and no actual advantage. The whole dentry type translation > really is fs-specific and it might just happen to be shared. But why > share it if it only adds complexity and unnecessary abstraction? The ext2/ext4 patches don't show much improvement. The other patches show more: fs/nilfs2/dir.c | 52 ++++++++++-------------------- include/uapi/linux/nilfs2_ondisk.h | 1 + 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-) (for example). UFS ends up benefiting the most. You can see the whole diffstat here: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20181023201952.GA15676@pathfinder/ We'd see a lot more improvement in line count if Philip weren't quite so paranoid about checking FOOFS_FT_* == FT_* at build time; eg for btrfs: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20181023211728.GA16584@pathfinder/
