From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/18] fs: introduce a per-cpu last_ino allocator Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2010 12:22:01 -0400 Message-ID: <20101016162201.GF16861@infradead.org> References: <1286515292-15882-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1286515292-15882-16-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <20101008095658.GA19804@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20101008100346.GA27737@infradead.org> <20101016075721.GS19147@amd> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Al Viro , Dave Chinner , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Nick Piggin Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20101016075721.GS19147@amd> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 06:57:21PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote: > My approach in my tree is a new function like Al suggests, which > simply doesn't assign the ino. That keeps compatibility backward. There's really no point. The concept of creating a new inode has absolutely nothing to do with i_ino. We'll just need i_ino before adding an inode to the hash. The only reason it's been done by new_inode is historic coincidence - cleaning this mess up is a good thing independent of making the fake inode number generation scale better. As you can see in my patch moving it out there's actually only very few filesystems that need it.