Re: [PATCH 0/3] ensure unique i_ino in filesystems without permanent inode numbers (introduction)

[JÃrn Engel]

On Fri, 15 December 2006 08:05:24 -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
> Jeff Layton wrote:
> > Apologies for the long email, but I couldn't come up with a way to explain
> > this in fewer words. Many filesystems that are part of the linux kernel
> > have problems with how they have assign out i_ino values:
> >
> 
> If there are no further comments/suggestions on this patchset, I'd like to
> ask Andrew to add it to -mm soon and target getting it rolled into 2.6.21.

I'm still unsure whether idr has a sufficient advantage over simply
hashing the inodes.  Hch has suggested that keeping the hashtable
smaller is good for performance.  But idr adds new complexity, which
should be avoided on its own right.  So is the performance benefit big
enough to add more complexity?  Is it even measurable?

JÃrn

-- 
Fancy algorithms are buggier than simple ones, and they're much harder
to implement. Use simple algorithms as well as simple data structures.
-- Rob Pike
-
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/