Re: [PATCH] cramfs: generate unique inode number for better inodecache usage

[Linus Torvalds]

On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 3:32 PM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Why do you repeat that
>
>    inode = iget_locked(sb, cramino(cramfs_inode, offset));
>    if (inode && (inode->i_state & I_NEW)) {
>
> so many times?
>
> Wouldn't it be nicer to just do it once at the top?

Oh, and I think it's probably nicer to then do the if-statements as a

   switch (cram_inode->mode & S_IFMT) {
   case S_IFREG:
   ..

but what I objected to in the previous patch was doing it multiple
times, and moving the nice separate helper function into the caller.

So I _think_ you should be able to just do something like this:

   ino = cramino(cramfs_inode, offset);
   switch (cram_inode->mode & S_IFMT) {
   case S_IFREG:
      fops = generic_ro_fops;
      aops = &cramfs_aops;
      break;
   case S_IFDIR:
      ...
   default:
       ino = CRAMINO_UNIQ(offset);
   }
   inode = iget_locked(sb, ino);
   if (inode && (inode->i_state & I_NEW)) {
      inode->i_ops = iops;
      inode->i_fops = fops;
      inode->i_data.a_ops = aops;
      setup_inode(inode, cramfs_inode, cramfs_inode->size);
    }

or whatever?

                   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/