[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1286533219.2959.128.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2010 12:20:19 +0200
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/18] fs: introduce a per-cpu last_ino allocator
Le vendredi 08 octobre 2010 à 06:03 -0400, Christoph Hellwig a écrit :
> On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 10:56:58AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > FWIW, that one is begging to be split; what I mean is that there are
> > two classes of callers; ones that will set i_ino themselves anyway
> > and ones that really want i_ino invented. Two functions?
>
> There's no reason to add i_ino before adding it to the per-sb list,
> we don't do so either for inodes acquired via iget. The fix is simply
> to stop assigning i_ino in new_inode and call the helper to get it in
> the place that need it after the call to new_inode. Later we can
> even move to a lazy assignment scheme where needed. I'd also really
> like to get a grip on why the simple counters if fine for some
> filesystems while we need iunique() for others.
If iunique() was scalable, sockets could use it, so that we can have
hard guarantee two sockets on machine dont have same inum.
A reasonable compromise here is to use a simple and scalable allocator,
and take the risk two sockets have same inum.
While it might break some applications playing fstats() games, on
sockets, current schem is vastly faster.
I worked with machines with millions of opened socket concurrently,
iunique() was not an option, and application didnt care of possible inum
clash.
For disk files, inum _must_ be unique per fs, for sockets, its only if
you want strict compliance to some standards.
--
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