On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 5:28 PM, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 08:56:28PM +0800, zwu.kernel@xxxxxxxxx wrote: >> From: Zhi Yong Wu <wuzhy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Introduce one new mount option '-o hottrack', >> and add its parsing support. >> Its usage looks like: >> mount -o hottrack >> mount -o nouser,hottrack >> mount -o nouser,hottrack,loop >> mount -o hottrack,nouser > > I think that this option parsing should be done by the filesystem, > even though the tracking functionality is in the VFS. That way ony > the filesystems that can use the tracking information will turn it > on, rather than being able to turn it on for everything regardless > of whether it is useful or not. > > Along those lines, just using a normal superblock flag to indicate > it is active (e.g. MS_HOT_INODE_TRACKING in sb->s_flags) means you > don't need to allocate the sb->s_hot_info structure just to be able If we don't allocate one sb->s_hot_info, where will those hash list head and btree roots locate? > to check whether we are tracking hot inodes or not. > > This then means the hot inode tracking for the superblock can be > initialised by the filesystem as part of it's fill_super method, > along with the filesystem specific code that will use the hot > tracking information the VFS gathers.... > > Cheers, > > Dave. > -- > Dave Chinner > david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Regards, Zhi Yong Wu -- 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
