[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4C49AFAE.1070300@vflare.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 20:35:18 +0530
From: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@...are.org>
To: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@...cle.com>
CC: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
adilger@....com, tytso@....edu, mfasheh@...e.com,
Joel Becker <joel.becker@...cle.com>, matthew@....cx,
linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
ocfs2-devel@....oracle.com, linux-mm@...ck.org, jeremy@...p.org,
JBeulich@...ell.com, Kurt Hackel <kurt.hackel@...cle.com>,
npiggin@...e.de, Dave Mccracken <dave.mccracken@...cle.com>,
riel@...hat.com, avi@...hat.com,
Konrad Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 0/8] Cleancache: overview
On 07/23/2010 08:14 PM, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
>> From: Christoph Hellwig [mailto:hch@...radead.org]
>> Also making the ops vector global is just a bad idea.
>> There is nothing making this sort of caching inherently global.
>
> I'm not sure I understand your point, but two very different
> users of cleancache have been provided, and more will be
> discussed at the MM summit next month.
>
> Do you have a suggestion on how to avoid a global ops
> vector while still serving the needs of both existing
> users?
Maybe introduce cleancache_register(struct cleancache_ops *ops)?
This will allow making cleancache_ops non-global. No value add
but maybe that's cleaner?
Thanks,
Nitin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists