From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Rearrange i_flags to be consistent with FS_IOC_GETFLAGS
Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2010 00:45:25 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5045.1278459925@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100706230312.GB25018@dastard>
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> wrote:
> I'd prefer generic flags are not dependent on fixed values from a
> specific filesystem several layers down the storage stack.
They're not so dependent. They're based on the FS_IOC_[GS]ETFLAGS ioctl which
even XFS translates its flags for. These ioctl flags must now remain
invariant. Whilst they might have originated as Ext2/3/4 flags, they're now
independent of that.
> Also, if the problem you are trying to solve is overhead of calculating the
> flags for stat() on RISC architectures, then I'd argue that XFS is just as
> important target for such an optimisation because it is widely used in small
> ARM and MIPS based NAS appliances....
This can be argued one way or another, however aligning i_flags with something
would probably be an improvement somewhere. Most of what I deal with is Ext3/4
based, and BTRFS-based is likely to become important too.
David
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-07-06 23:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-07-05 15:43 [PATCH] Rearrange i_flags to be consistent with FS_IOC_GETFLAGS David Howells
2010-07-05 15:54 ` Eric Sandeen
2010-07-05 17:27 ` tytso
2010-07-06 0:10 ` Dave Chinner
2010-07-06 13:40 ` David Howells
2010-07-06 23:03 ` Dave Chinner
2010-07-06 23:45 ` David Howells [this message]
2010-07-07 1:55 ` Dave Chinner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5045.1278459925@redhat.com \
--to=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.