From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/15] driver core: Implement tagged directory support for device classes. Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 22:41:14 -0700 Message-ID: References: <486DD650.3000804@gmail.com> <486E2C3B.6020603@gmail.com> <20080704161200.GA1440@suse.de> <487D6A24.9070001@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Greg KH , Andrew Morton , Daniel Lezcano , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Al Viro , Linux Containers , Benjamin Thery , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Tejun Heo Return-path: Received: from out01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.231]:52344 "EHLO out01.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750944AbYGPFma (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jul 2008 01:42:30 -0400 In-Reply-To: <487D6A24.9070001@gmail.com> (Tejun Heo's message of "Wed, 16 Jul 2008 12:25:24 +0900") Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Tejun Heo writes: > Greg, please disregard my earlier NACKs and commit the patches if you're > okay with them. I'm working on cleaning it up but I don't think I'll be > able to make it in time for merge window and as Eric said getting the > functionality in place is more important at this point as it doesn't > affect user visible interface. > > Eric, with the multiple superblocks, sysfs now uses inode from the > default sysfs_sb with dentries from other sb's. Is this okay? Are > there any other filesystems which do this? I don't know of any other filesystems where this unique challenge arises. /proc almost qualifies but it never needs to be modified. It is certainly ok to go from multiple dentries to a single inode. I'm trying to remember why I choose to do that. I think both because it simplifies the locking and keeps us more efficient in the icache. Eric