[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b9794188-f1e1-20ab-6aec-04312cbb02bf@linux.alibaba.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2022 14:34:46 +0800
From: JeffleXu <jefflexu@...ux.alibaba.com>
To: Jia Zhu <zhujia.zj@...edance.com>, linux-erofs@...ts.ozlabs.org,
xiang@...nel.org, chao@...nel.org
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
yinxin.x@...edance.com, huyue2@...lpad.com
Subject: Re: [External] Re: [PATCH V2 2/5] erofs: introduce fscache-based
domain
On 9/13/22 12:31 PM, Jia Zhu wrote:
>
>
> 在 2022/9/9 16:42, JeffleXu 写道:
>>> int erofs_fscache_register_cookie(struct super_block *sb,
>>> struct erofs_fscache **fscache,
>>> char *name, bool need_inode)
>>> @@ -495,7 +581,8 @@ int erofs_fscache_register_fs(struct super_block
>>> *sb)
>>> char *name;
>>> int ret = 0;
>>> - name = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "erofs,%s", sbi->opt.fsid);
>>> + name = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "erofs,%s",
>>> + sbi->domain ? sbi->domain->domain_id : sbi->opt.fsid);
>>
>> Do we also need to encode the cookie name in the "<domain_id>,<fsid>"
>> format? This will affect the path of the cache files.
>>
> I think even though the cookies have the same name, they belong to
> different volumes(path). Cookies do not affect each other.
> Are there other benefits to doing so?
Okay. The current implementation is correct. Please ignore the noise.
--
Thanks,
Jingbo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists