On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 10:58:24AM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 10:22:34AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > > > From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > new_inode() dirties a contended cache line to get increasing > > > inode numbers. This limits performance on workloads that cause > > > significant parallel inode allocation. > > > > > > Solve this problem by using a per_cpu variable fed by the shared > > > last_ino in batches of 1024 allocations. This reduces contention on > > > the shared last_ino, and give same spreading ino numbers than before > > > (i.e. same wraparound after 2^32 allocations). > > > > This doesn't help for Unix disk file systems, so not fully sure why you > > need it for XFS. > > > > But looks reasonable, although it would be better to simply fix > > sockets/pipes/etc. to not allocate an inode numbers. > > Can be done if you bother to add ->getattr() for those, but you'll need > to do some kind of lazy allocation of inumbers for those; fstat() _will_ > want st_ino. Why not just put 0 in st_ino for sockets/pipes/etc. ? -Andi -- ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Speaking for myself only. -- 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
