Daniel Phillips wrote:
>
>By the way, we can trivially shrink every inode by 6 bytes, right now, with:
>
>- __u32 i_faddr;
>- __u8 i_frag_no;
>- __u8 i_frag_size;
>
>--
>Daniel
>-
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
>the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
>
Using a union of filesystems, that might not even be compiled into the
kernel or as modules, in struct inode is just..... bad.
It is really annoying when the filesystems with larger inodes bloat up
the size for those who are careful with their bytes, can we do something
about that generally?
(There are quite a variety of ways to do something about it, if there is
a will.) I have programmers who come to me asking for permission for
adding bloat to our part of struct inode , and when they point out that
it does no good to save on bytes unless ext2 does, well..... what can I say?
Hans
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Dec 15 2001 - 21:00:13 EST