On 9/13/22 12:31 PM, Jia Zhu wrote: > > > 在 2022/9/9 16:42, JeffleXu 写道: >>> int erofs_fscache_register_cookie(struct super_block *sb, >>> struct erofs_fscache **fscache, >>> char *name, bool need_inode) >>> @@ -495,7 +581,8 @@ int erofs_fscache_register_fs(struct super_block >>> *sb) >>> char *name; >>> int ret = 0; >>> - name = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "erofs,%s", sbi->opt.fsid); >>> + name = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "erofs,%s", >>> + sbi->domain ? sbi->domain->domain_id : sbi->opt.fsid); >> >> Do we also need to encode the cookie name in the "<domain_id>,<fsid>" >> format? This will affect the path of the cache files. >> > I think even though the cookies have the same name, they belong to > different volumes(path). Cookies do not affect each other. > Are there other benefits to doing so? Okay. The current implementation is correct. Please ignore the noise. -- Thanks, Jingbo
