[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1183472682.6494.38.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org>
Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 10:24:42 -0400
From: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>
To: cmm@...ibm.com
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
nfsv4@...ux-nfs.org
Subject: Re: [EXT4 set 4][PATCH 1/5] i_version:64 bit inode version
On Mon, 2007-07-02 at 10:58 -0400, Mingming Cao wrote:
> Trond or Bruce, can you please review these patch series and ack if you
> agrees? Thanks.
>
> As to performance concerns that raise before the inode version counter
> (at least for ext4) is done inside ext4_mark_inode_dirty), so there is
> no extra IO work to store this counter to disk.
Hi Mingming,
It looks OK to me, but you might want to strip out the now redundant
i_version updates in add_dirent_to_buf(), ext4_rmdir(), ext4_rename().
I also have some questions about how this will affect the readdir code:
unless I missed something, the filp->f_version is still unsigned long,
so the comparisons and assignments in ext4_readdir()/ext4_dx_readdir()
no longer make sense.
Cheers
Trond
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists