xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 2/4] XFS: Return case-insensitive match for dentry cache

To: Barry Naujok <bnaujok@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] XFS: Return case-insensitive match for dentry cache
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2008 05:46:41 -0400
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20080421085947.GA10399@infradead.org>
References: <20080421083103.433280025@chook.melbourne.sgi.com> <20080421083644.809426871@chook.melbourne.sgi.com> <20080421085947.GA10399@infradead.org>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)
> > +kmem_zone_t        *xfs_name_zone;
> 
> What about just using kmalloc here?  We know the length of the name
> anyway, so there is no point of allocating the maximum possible size.
> 
> >     error = xfs_iget(dp->i_mount, NULL, inum, 0, 0, ipp, 0);
> > -   if (error)
> > +   if (error) {
> > +           if (ci_match && *ci_match)
> > +                   xfs_name_free(name->name);
> >             goto out;
> > +   }
> 
> All the allocation and freeing for ci_match looks odd and error prone
> to me.  I think the low-level directory code should never allocate
> args->value unless it's explicitly asked for a CI match.  That way
> there's only one place in xfs_ci_lookup to free it either.

Also the low-level name duplication code could be factored out a little
more ala:

/*
 * If a case-insensitive match, allocate a buffer and copy the actual
 * name into the buffer. Return it via args->value.
 */
void xfs_copy_ci_name(struct xfs_da_args *args, const char *name, int namelen)
{
        if (args->return_ci_name && args->cmpresult == XFS_CMP_CASE) {
                args->valuelen = namelen;
                args->value = kmemdup(name, namelen, GFP_NOFS);
                /* error handled in higher layers */
        }
}

Instead of adding args->return_ci_name it might make sense to just
replace the last four chars there with an unsigned short lookup_flags
and just set bits in it.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>