From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 241D2C43331 for ; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 16:25:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F371920679 for ; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 16:25:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727361AbfKLQZb (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Nov 2019 11:25:31 -0500 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:56726 "EHLO verein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726958AbfKLQZb (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Nov 2019 11:25:31 -0500 Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 149B268BE1; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 17:25:28 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2019 17:25:26 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: Christoph Hellwig , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] xfs: don't reset the "inode core" in xfs_iread Message-ID: <20191112162526.GA14170@lst.de> References: <20191020082145.32515-1-hch@lst.de> <20191020082145.32515-4-hch@lst.de> <20191112162421.GZ6219@magnolia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191112162421.GZ6219@magnolia> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 08:24:21AM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 10:21:44AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > We have the exact same memset in xfs_inode_alloc, which is always called > > just before xfs_iread. > > > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig > > Seems fine on its own, but then I looked at all the zero initializers > and memsets in xfs_inode_alloc and wondered why we don't just > kmem_zone_zalloc the inode? Because kmem_zone_zalloc doesn't interact well with the rcu lookup schemes and the constructor. That being said I have some plans for this area as part of getting rid of the "dinode core" later on.