Re: [patch v2] epoll use a single inode ...

[Davide Libenzi]

On Sat, 10 Mar 2007, Pavel Machek wrote:

> > Heh, this is what Al was saying ;)
> > I'm fine with that, but how about counter cycles (going back to zero)? 
> 
> Just use u64?

Yeah, the second patch was using an u64.
I ended up using a "class" name (signalfd, timerfd, asyncfd) as dname 
entry. An incremental counter would not add any useful information, and 
noone will ever care about dentry name of those objects. Prolly the class 
name is the only thing you might want to know, or we can drop even that 
and use a shared dentry for everything.


- Davide


-
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/