[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5045.1278459925@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2010 00:45:25 +0100
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, viro@...IV.linux.org.uk,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Rearrange i_flags to be consistent with FS_IOC_GETFLAGS
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com> wrote:
> I'd prefer generic flags are not dependent on fixed values from a
> specific filesystem several layers down the storage stack.
They're not so dependent. They're based on the FS_IOC_[GS]ETFLAGS ioctl which
even XFS translates its flags for. These ioctl flags must now remain
invariant. Whilst they might have originated as Ext2/3/4 flags, they're now
independent of that.
> Also, if the problem you are trying to solve is overhead of calculating the
> flags for stat() on RISC architectures, then I'd argue that XFS is just as
> important target for such an optimisation because it is widely used in small
> ARM and MIPS based NAS appliances....
This can be argued one way or another, however aligning i_flags with something
would probably be an improvement somewhere. Most of what I deal with is Ext3/4
based, and BTRFS-based is likely to become important too.
David
--
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