Re: [PATCH] adding per sb inode list to make invalidate_inodes() faster

[William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>]

On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 08:51:45AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Hmm.. I don't mind the approach per se, but I get very nervous about the 
> fact that I don't see any initialization of "inode->i_sb_list".
> Yes, you do a
> 	list_add(&inode->i_sb_list, &sb->s_inodes);
> in new_inode(), but there are a ton of users that allocate inodes other 
> ways, and more importantly, even if this was the only allocation function, 
> you do various "list_del(&inode->i_sb_list)" things which leaves the inode 
> around but with an invalid superblock list.
> So at the very _least_, you should document why all of this is safe very 
> carefully (I get nervous about fundamental FS infrastructure changes), and 
> it should be left to simmer in -mm for a longish time to make sure it 
> really works..
> Call me chicken.

Some version of this patch has been in 2.6.x-mm for a long while. I've
not reviewed this version of the patch for differences with the -mm
code. It would probably be best to look at the -mm bits as they've had
sustained exposure for quite some time.


-- wli