Re: [patch] epoll use a single inode ...

[Linus Torvalds]

On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> 
> I would definitly *love* saving dentries for pipes (and sockets too), but how
> are you going to get the inode ?

Don't use an inode at all.

> pipes()/sockets() can use read()/write()/rw_verify_area() and thus need
> file->f_path.dentry->d_inode (so each pipe needs a separate dentry)

No, at least pipes could easily just use "file->f_private_data" instead.

Now, sockets really do want the inode (or it would be really really big 
changes), but pipes really just want a "struct pipe_inode_info" pointer, 
which we could hide away directly in the file descriptor itself.

That's what Davide already did (on my suggestion) for signalfd - there's a 
*single* inode, and the real data is in the per-fd f_private_data.

		Linus
-
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/