On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 06:02:01PM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote: > On Mon, 2010-10-25 at 14:41 -0400, Eric Paris wrote: > > <snip> > > > I believe that IBM is going to look into making i_readcount a first > > class citizen which can be used by both IMA and generic_setlease(). > > Then people could say IMA had 0 per inode overhead :) > > This patchset separates the incrementing/decrementing of the i_readcount, > in the VFS layer, from other IMA functionality, by replacing the current > ima_counts_get() call with iget_readcount(). Its unclear whether this > call to increment i_readcount should be made earlier. Why the wrapper functions and locking? Why not an atomic variable like i_writecount? 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
