From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758766Ab0JFIv6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Oct 2010 04:51:58 -0400 Received: from canuck.infradead.org ([134.117.69.58]:53037 "EHLO canuck.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758571Ab0JFIv4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Oct 2010 04:51:56 -0400 Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2010 04:51:31 -0400 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Dave Chinner Cc: Christoph Hellwig , dada1@cosmosbay.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/17] fs: inode per-cpu last_ino allocator Message-ID: <20101006085131.GA7295@lst.de> References: <1285762729-17928-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1285762729-17928-16-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <20100930020759.GC1535@infradead.org> <20101006062921.GA32255@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20101006062921.GA32255@dastard> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-17) X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by canuck.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 05:29:21PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > Sounds like a good plan, but I don't really have time right now to > understand the iget routines of every single filesystem to determine > which rely on the current new_inode() allocated inode number. I > think that is best left for a later cleanup, seeing as the > last_ino scalability problem is easily addressed... It's fairly easy to do it pessimisticly - all disk based filesystem don't need it. Anyway, I can do this ontop of your series later. It just seems a bit counter-intuitive to scale something we don't actually need it most cases.