Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Tue, 9 Nov 2010 12:15:22 -0500 | | From | Christoph Hellwig <> | | Subject | Re: [patch 1/6] fs: icache RCU free inodes |
| |
On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 09:08:17AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Again, this is only an issue for non-dentry lookup. For the dentry > case, we know that if the dentry still exists, then the inode still > exists. So we don't need to check a stable inode pointer if we just > verify the stability of the dentry - and we'll have to do that anyway > obviously.
If the dentry still exists we have a reference on the inode and never call into the inode hash.
> In other words: let's bite off the complexity in small chunks. Let's > keep the inode lock approach for now for the actual inode lists and > hash lookups. I think they are almost entirely independent issues from > the dentry path.
I'm defintively in favour of splitting things into small chunks. I don't particularly care how we do it. inode_lock scaling seems the most simple bit to me, and even that turned out to be a massive amount of work to do properly.
Doing the dentry_lock splitup last starts to look more and more interesting given how messy inode_lock is, though.
|  |