linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 15/18] fs: introduce a per-cpu last

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 16 Oct 2010 12:22:01 -0400
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk>
Cc:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	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

On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 06:57:21PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> My approach in my tree is a new function like Al suggests, which
> simply doesn't assign the ino. That keeps compatibility backward.

There's really no point.  The concept of creating a new inode has
absolutely nothing to do with i_ino.  We'll just need i_ino before
adding an inode to the hash.  The only reason it's been done by
new_inode is historic coincidence - cleaning this mess up is a good
thing independent of making the fake inode number generation scale
better.  As you can see in my patch moving it out there's actually
only very few filesystems that need it.

--
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/