Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 24 May 2002 13:00:14 -0400 (EDT) | From | Alexander Viro <> | Subject | Re: negative dentries wasting ram |
| |
On Fri, 24 May 2002, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Fri, 24 May 2002, Alexander Viro wrote: > > > > On Fri, 24 May 2002, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > > > However, you're right that it probably doesn't help to do this after > > > "unlink()" - it's probably only worth doing when actually doing a > > > "lookup()" that fails. > > > > Depends on many things, including the amount of userland code that does > > unlink(name); > > open(name, O_CREAT|O_EXCL..., ...); > > Note that this will have to touch the FS anyway, since the O_CREAT thing > forces a call down to the FS to actually create the file.
> The only think we save is a dentry kfree/kmalloc in this case, nbot a FS > downcall. And I think Andrea is right that it can waste memory for the > likely much more common case where the file just stays removed.
??? It's lookup + unlink + lookup + create vs. lookup + unlink + create.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |