On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 01:25:34PM +0800, Zhi Yong Wu wrote: >> 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? > > I wrote that thinking (mistakenly) that s-hot)info was dynamically > allocated rather than being embedded in the struct super_block. > > Indeed, if the mount option is held in s_flags, then it could be > dynamically allocated, but I don't think that's really necessary... ah, you prefer allocating it, OK, let me try. thanks for your explaination. > > 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
