Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 23 Jul 2010 10:43:17 -0700 (PDT) | From | Dan Magenheimer <> | Subject | RE: [PATCH V3 0/8] Cleancache: overview |
| |
> From: Nitin Gupta [mailto:ngupta@vflare.org] > Sent: Friday, July 23, 2010 9:05 AM > To: Dan Magenheimer > Cc: Christoph Hellwig; akpm@linux-foundation.org; Chris Mason; > viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk; adilger@sun.com; tytso@mit.edu; > mfasheh@suse.com; Joel Becker; matthew@wil.cx; linux- > btrfs@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux- > fsdevel@vger.kernel.org; linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org; ocfs2- > devel@oss.oracle.com; linux-mm@kvack.org; jeremy@goop.org; > JBeulich@novell.com; Kurt Hackel; npiggin@suse.de; Dave Mccracken; > riel@redhat.com; avi@redhat.com; Konrad Wilk > Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 0/8] Cleancache: overview > > On 07/23/2010 08:14 PM, Dan Magenheimer wrote: > >> From: Christoph Hellwig [mailto:hch@infradead.org] > > > >> Also making the ops vector global is just a bad idea. > >> There is nothing making this sort of caching inherently global. > > > > I'm not sure I understand your point, but two very different > > users of cleancache have been provided, and more will be > > discussed at the MM summit next month. > > > > Do you have a suggestion on how to avoid a global ops > > vector while still serving the needs of both existing > > users? > > Maybe introduce cleancache_register(struct cleancache_ops *ops)? > This will allow making cleancache_ops non-global. No value add > but maybe that's cleaner?
Oh, OK, that seems reasonable.
Dan
| |