From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com>
Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25])
	by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id
	oA89I7lS090935 for <xfs@oss.sgi.com>; Mon, 8 Nov 2010 03:18:07 -0600
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 5CF3716013C
	for <xfs@oss.sgi.com>; Mon,  8 Nov 2010 01:19:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [18.85.46.34])
	by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id gNuWexsE269WmOCk for
	<xfs@oss.sgi.com>; Mon, 08 Nov 2010 01:19:34 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 04:19:30 -0500
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/16] patch xfs-inode-hash-fake
Message-ID: <20101108091930.GA2806@infradead.org>
References: <1289206519-18377-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com>
	<1289206519-18377-7-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1289206519-18377-7-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com>
List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI <xfs.oss.sgi.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/options/xfs>,
	<mailto:xfs-request@oss.sgi.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://oss.sgi.com/pipermail/xfs>
List-Post: <mailto:xfs@oss.sgi.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xfs-request@oss.sgi.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs>,
	<mailto:xfs-request@oss.sgi.com?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com
Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com

Missing a good subject and description.

Anyway, I think we should add an inode_mark_hashed header, similar to
the read-side inode_hashed to avoid exposing the exact list
implementation to filesystems.

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs