Re: [patch v2] epoll use a single inode ...

Davide Libenzi
2007-03-10T08:24:47Z

On Sat, 10 Mar 2007, Pavel Machek wrote:

> > Heh, this is what Al was saying ;)
> > I'm fine with that, but how about counter cycles (going back to zero)?
>
> Just use u64?

Yeah, the second patch was using an u64.
I ended up using a "class" name (signalfd, timerfd, asyncfd) as dname
entry. An incremental counter would not add any useful information, and
noone will ever care about dentry name of those objects. Prolly the class
name is the only thing you might want to know, or we can drop even that
and use a shared dentry for everything.

- Davide