On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 05:29:21PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > Sounds like a good plan, but I don't really have time right now to > understand the iget routines of every single filesystem to determine > which rely on the current new_inode() allocated inode number. I > think that is best left for a later cleanup, seeing as the > last_ino scalability problem is easily addressed... It's fairly easy to do it pessimisticly - all disk based filesystem don't need it. Anyway, I can do this ontop of your series later. It just seems a bit counter-intuitive to scale something we don't actually need it most cases. -- 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
