On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 12:33:27PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 02:42:42PM +1100, npiggin@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > > Provide new_anon_inode function for inodes without a default inode number, and > > not on sb list. This can enable filesystems to reduce locking. "Real" > > filesystems can also reduce locking by allocating anonymous inode first, then > > adding it to lists after finding the inode number. > > Having an _anon inode allocation for fileystsem that do manage the inode > lifetime is fine, but please don't mix that up with i_ino assignment, > as they are two totally different things. > > Disk and network filesystem do not need a default i_ino, but they > absolutely do no need their inodes to be on the per-sb list. > anonfs/pipe/socket (and nothing else) can do away with the per-sb list, > but they do need a pseudo inode number. Probably bad wording of "anon". It should be "raw", maybe. The filesystem is then of course responsible for adding i_ino and/or to lists. > I have a version of this port to Dave's tree which gets this right. > i_ino assignment is already moved out by my patch (which should apply > to your tree with minimal differences), so the new _anon only does not > put the inode on the list. The other difference is that we don't bother > initializing i_sb_list in the main inode allocation path, but only in > new_anon_inode, and that the function is not exported - it really should > only be used for built-in filesystems that never get unmounted to be > safe. I'll check it. -- 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
