[lkml]   [2006]   [Jun]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [RFC] Slimming down struct inode
    Hi Nikita,

    On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 02:29:39PM +0400, Nikita Danilov wrote:
    > Sorry, but why this operation is needed? Generic code (in fs/*.c)
    > doesn't use ->i_blksize at all. If XFS wants to provide per-inode
    > st_blksize, all it has to do is to store preferred buffer size in its
    > file system specific inode (struct xfs_inode), and use something
    > different from generic_fillattr() as its ->i_op->getattr() callback
    > (xfs_vn_getattr()).

    We already do this. The original questions were related to whether
    i_blksize and i_blkbits need to be per-inode or per-filesystem, and
    thats what I was trying to answer...

    | 1) Move i_blksize (optimal size for I/O, reported by the stat system
    | call). Is there any reason why this needs to be per-inode, instead
    | of per-filesystem?
    | 2) Move i_blkbits (blocksize for doing direct I/O in bits) to struct
    | super. Again, why is this per-inode?

    As to whether a new inode operation is useful/needed - *shrug* - not
    really my call, I was saying we can work with whatever ends up being
    the final solution, provided it keeps per-inode granularity.


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2006-06-14 23:54    [W:0.019 / U:2.812 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site