Re: dentry bloat.
Date: Sun May 09 2004 - 17:18:06 EST
On Sun, May 09, 2004 at 09:03:16PM +0530, Dipankar Sarma wrote:
> Actually, what may happen is that since the dentries are added
> in the front, a double move like that would result in hash chain
> traversal looping. Timing dependent and unlikely, but d_move_count
> avoided that theoritical possibility. It is not about skipping
> dentries which is safe because a miss would result in a real_lookup()
Not really. A miss could result in getting another dentry allocated
for the same e.g. directory, which is *NOT* harmless at all.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/