Re: question of copying stack in ovl_lookup()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 10:35 AM, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> We could pack the ovl_entry further to 32 bytes with or without cache
> pool. Not sure if it is worse it though(?):
>
> struct ovl_path {
>         unsigned short reserved;
>         unsigned short layer_idx;
>         struct dentry *dentry;
> };
>
> struct ovl_entry {
>         union {
>                 struct {
>                         unsigned long flags;

Heh, this anonymous struct is no longer needed.

>                 };
>                 struct rcu_head rcu;

Not sure what are we protecting in overlay_entry with rcu.  A comment
somewhere would be good.  Will need to investigate...

>         };
>         union {
>                 unsigned short numlower;
>                 struct ovl_path lowerstack[1];
>         };
> };

Ugly.

Thanks,
Miklos
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-unionfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystems Devel]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux