On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 06:57:11PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 01:02:50PM +1000, npiggin@xxxxxxx wrote: > > RCU free the struct inode. This will allow: > > Rather than what it will allow, what are the constraints this > imposes on allocating and freeing a struct inode? e.g. XFS embeds > the struct inode in a larger inode structure and does it's own > allocation, caching and freeing of the larger structure outside of > the VFS functionality. > > Does this need to be converted to RCU? Do we need to do more > initialisation of the struct inode than we currently do? What > functions/call chains now implicitly require RCU freeing semantics > on the struct inode for safe operation? What else do we need to be > aware of? Yeah, filesystems with their own freeing functions will need to do a call_rcu to free it (many are not converted). Otherwise, there is nothing else to know. They could take advantage of RCU if they would like though. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
