On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 07:31:30AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 09:47:27PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > The only reason XFS hashed the inodes was to avoid problems in the > > generic code that checked for unhashed inodes during clear_inode(). The > > evict() changeover moved that unhashed check into > > generic_drop_inode(), which the filesystem can override. Hence if > > you add a ->drop_inode() method for XFS that just checks the link > > count, we can avoid ha??hing the inodes altogether for XFS. > > > > I can add another patch on top of this one to do that if you want... > > It's unfortunately not that simple. Take a look at the unhashed check > in __mark_inode_dirty. Damn - I forgot about that one. Does anyone know why that check is there? > The drop_inode check could be avoided for > quite a long time now. What we could do however is the same hack as > JFS does in diReadSpecial(). Nasty, but effective. Worth considering, I think. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- 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
