| To: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: 2.6.24-rc2 XFS nfsd hang |
| From: | "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 21 Nov 2007 14:03:50 -0500 |
| Cc: | Chris Wedgwood <cw@xxxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, LKML <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <20071121150746.GB8454@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20071114070400.GA25708@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20071114152952.GA4210@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20071114173922.GC14254@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <20071114174419.GA15271@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20071114175322.GD14254@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <20071114180241.GA16656@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20071114180838.GE14254@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <20071121150746.GB8454@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) |
On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 03:07:46PM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 01:08:38PM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > > Personally I'd prefer it to only grow a struct stat or rather it's members > > > But the nfsd code currently expects a dentry so this might require some > > > major refactoring. > > > > Well, we need to check for mountpoints, for example, so I don't see any > > way out of needing a dentry. What's the drawback? > > You're right - we'd probably need the dentry. The drawback is that > we need to always get it in the dcache. Which might be a good thing > depending on the workload. In any case, if the new api were only used by nfsd for now, then there'd be no change here. Seems like it might be worth a try. --b. |
| Previous by Date: | Re: XFS crash on linux raid, Alexander 'Leo' Bergolth |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH] bulkstat fixups, David Chinner |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: 2.6.24-rc2 XFS nfsd hang, Christoph Hellwig |
| Next by Thread: | [PATCH] xfs: revert to double-buffering readdir, Christoph Hellwig |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |