Re: [prepatch] address_space-based writeback

From: Pavel Machek (
Date: Fri May 03 2002 - 02:56:34 EST


> I'll repeat myself. What if some advanced fs has no sensible way of
> generating inode? Does it have to 'fake' it, just like [v]fat does it now?
> (Yes, vfat is not 'advanced' fs, let's not discuss it...)
> The fact that minix,ext[23],etc has inode #s is an *implementation detail*.
> Historically entrenched in Unix.
> Bad:
> inum_a = inode_num(file1);
> inum_b = inode_num(file2);
> if(inum_a == inum_b) { same_file(); }
> Better:
> if(is_hardlinked(file1,file2) { same_file(); }
> Yes, new syscal, blah, blah, blah... Not worth the effort, etc...
> lets start a flamewar...

Its worse: You have 1000 files with same size, how do you find which
are hardlinked? With inode_num() it is hashtable, doable with
O(n). With syscall we are talking O(n^2).

(about SSSCA) "I don't say this lightly.  However, I really think that the U.S.
no longer is classifiable as a democracy, but rather as a plutocracy." --hpa
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue May 07 2002 - 22:00:18 EST