| To: | Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Multi-CPU harmless lockdep on x86 while copying data |
| From: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 11 Mar 2014 09:48:16 -0700 |
| Cc: | "Michael L. Semon" <mlsemon35@xxxxxxxxx>, xfs-oss <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Delivered-to: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20140310205118.GX6851@dastard> |
| References: | <531BD8B9.1090400@xxxxxxxxx> <20140310025523.GV6851@dastard> <20140310103716.GA1431@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20140310111253.GA4801@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20140310205118.GX6851@dastard> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 07:51:18AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > Yeah, b) seems like the way to simplify it - the filestreams code > really only needs to track the parent/ag relationship rather than > the child/parent relationship if there is a reliable way of > determining the parent from the child. > > What do we do with hardlinked files in this case? I'm happy to say > "too bad" for these files mainly because the filestream allocator is > aimed at associating multiple file creations together, so hard links > really don't matter AFAICT... We could flatly refuse filesystems for files with i_nlink > 1, or just grab the first parent we get at. Refusing seems like the better alternative to me. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | [PATCH] xfs_db: hide debug bbmap output, Eric Sandeen |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [PATCH, RFC] xfs: simplify filestreams by taking advantake of the dentry cache, Christoph Hellwig |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Multi-CPU harmless lockdep on x86 while copying data, Dave Chinner |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Multi-CPU harmless lockdep on x86 while copying data, Dave Chinner |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |