Re: [PATCH 19/19] fs: do not assign default i_ino in new_inode

[Eric Dumazet]

Le samedi 16 octobre 2010 Ã 19:14 +1100, Dave Chinner a Ãcrit :
> From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
> 
> Instead of always assigning an increasing inode number in new_inode
> move the call to assign it into those callers that actually need it.
> For now callers that need it is estimated conservatively, that is
> the call is added to all filesystems that do not assign an i_ino
> by themselves.  For a few more filesystems we can avoid assigning
> any inode number given that they aren't user visible, and for others
> it could be done lazily when an inode number is actually needed,
> but that's left for later patches.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx>

I wonder if adding a flag in super_block to explicitely say :

"I dont need new_inode() allocates a i_ino for my new inode, because
I'll take care of this myself later"

would be safer, permiting each fs maintainer to assert the flag instead
of a single patch.



--
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/