Re: [PATCH 1/2] add lazy_getattr and lazy_readdir patches that defer i_ino assignment

Kirill Korotaev wrote:

Jeff,

taking into account the discussion about unawarness/uncertainty
of whether *unique* inode number is needed at all on pipe fds and such
do we need this at all?

Thanks,
Kirill

Fair enough, perhaps we should just not worry about it, and assume that theremight be collisions.

If so, I should probably just have Andrew withdraw the patch I submitted earlierto hash the inodes for pipefs. I'll look at other callers of new_inode and fixup any of the ones that need fixing.


Does that seem like the most reasonable approach?

-- Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH 1/2] add lazy_getattr and lazy_readdir patches that defer i_ino assignment
  - From: Kirill Korotaev <[email protected]>

References:
- [PATCH 1/2] add lazy_getattr and lazy_readdir patches that defer i_ino assignment
  - From: Jeff Layton <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/2] add lazy_getattr and lazy_readdir patches that defer i_ino assignment
  - From: Kirill Korotaev <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: [RFC] rfkill - Add support for input key to control wireless radio
Next by Date: Re: Fw: Re: [mm PATCH 4/6] RCU: (now) CPU hotplug
Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 1/2] add lazy_getattr and lazy_readdir patches that defer i_ino assignment
Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 1/2] add lazy_getattr and lazy_readdir patches that defer i_ino assignment
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Kernel Newbies] [Netfilter] [Bugtraq] [Photo] [Stuff] [Gimp] [Yosemite News] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Security] [Linux RAID] [Video 4 Linux] [Linux for the blind] [Linux Resources]