Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 31 May 1999 17:55:27 +0200 | From | Jamie Lokier <> | Subject | Re: large directory handling speed |
| |
Alexander Viro wrote: > > To populate the dentry cache, we should add "dentry without inode" -- a > > dentry for which we have the inode number, but haven't fetched the inode > > itself yet. The mechanism isn't there, but wouldn't be hard to add IMO. > > Thus your issue about icache reaping goes away completely. > > There is no such thing as persistent inode numbers on many filesystems, > VFAT included. Period. Inumbers are good for UNIX-type filesystems and > nowhere else. iget() is *badly* abused in many places and that leads to > shitload of race conditions.
I agree -- it's not a general solution, but perhaps a mechanism some filesystems can use if they want to and *do* have reliable iget()? The filesystems we actually use a lot can do this ;-)
-- Jamie
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |