Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] fs: new_inode_single() and iput_single()

[JÃrn Engel]

On Sat, 29 November 2008 09:45:09 +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>  
> +void iput_single(struct inode *inode)
> +{
> +	if (atomic_dec_and_test(&inode->i_count)) {
> +		destroy_inode(inode);
> +		percpu_counter_dec(&nr_inodes);
> +	}
> +}

I wonder if it is possible to avoid the atomic_dec_and_test() here, at
least in the common case, and combine it with the atomic_dec_and_test()
of the dentry.  A quick look at fs/inode.c indicates that inode->i_count
may never get changed for a SINGLE inode, except during creation or
deletion.

It might be worth to
- remove the conditional from iput_single() and measure that it makes a
  difference,
- poison SINGLE inodes with some value and
- put a BUG_ON() in __iget() that checks for the poison value.

I _think_ the BUG_ON() is unnecessary, but at least my brain is not
sufficient to convince me.  Can inotify somehow get a hold of a socket?
Or dquot (how insane would that be?)

JÃrn

-- 
Mac is for working,
Linux is for Networking,
Windows is for Solitaire!
-- stolen from dc
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/