From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [RFC] fs, proc: Introduce the /proc//map_files/ directory v2 Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 23:12:13 +0200 Message-ID: <20110825211213.GP2803@mtj.dyndns.org> References: <20110824085329.GL29452@sun> <20110824111806.GA7191@albatros> <20110825082944.GH10030@sun> <20110825170147.GM2803@mtj.dyndns.org> <20110825170705.GA6387@sun> <20110825205426.GO2803@mtj.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Vasiliy Kulikov , Nathan Lynch , Oren Laadan , Daniel Lezcano , Andrew Morton , Pavel Emelyanov , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, James Bottomley , LINUXFS-ML , containers@lists.osdl.org, Zan Lynx , Andi Kleen To: Cyrill Gorcunov Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110825205426.GO2803@mtj.dyndns.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org Hello, again. On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 10:54:26PM +0200, Tejun Heo wrote: > Another thing is, I don't really see why we need vm_start, or fd for > that matter, in proc_inode at all. proc_inode is created on the fly > only as dentry gets instantiated on demand, which means we always have > d_name on hand to tell what the file is supposed to point to. In > fact, the code already uses name_to_int() to extract fd from d_name. > Hmmm... well yeah, it actually seems that proc_inode->fd is never used > and we can simply remove it. Unfortunately, not quite as easy as I expected. The information still seems redundant but it seems we'll need to change proc_inode->get_link() to take dentry instead of inode before doing away with proc_inode->fd, but, at any rate, I don't think this is a big deal one way or the other. Thanks. -- tejun