On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 04:14:54PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
quoted text
> Humm, we were trying to get rid of file_list_lock(), this puts up
> another user of the sb file list.
> 
> Also, that loop looks horribly expensive: n*(1+m); where n is the list
> size, and m the number of matching fds.
> 
> Granted, I see no other options either.

Something like the loop above is not going to go in for sure.  Once we
get rid of the sb->s_files we can put the list_head in struct file to
new use eventually if we don't want to get rid of it.  E.g. and
per-inode list would be much better than the per-superblock one and
would regularize what the tty driver is doing.

But I'm not too interesting in hashing out these details currently,
my primary concern is to get the per-mount r/o plus fallout like the
correct remount r/o and file_list_lock removal in and stable first.

--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/