On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>
> I would definitly *love* saving dentries for pipes (and sockets too), but how
> are you going to get the inode ?
Don't use an inode at all.
> pipes()/sockets() can use read()/write()/rw_verify_area() and thus need
> file->f_path.dentry->d_inode (so each pipe needs a separate dentry)
No, at least pipes could easily just use "file->f_private_data" instead.
Now, sockets really do want the inode (or it would be really really big
changes), but pipes really just want a "struct pipe_inode_info" pointer,
which we could hide away directly in the file descriptor itself.
That's what Davide already did (on my suggestion) for signalfd - there's a
*single* inode, and the real data is in the per-fd f_private_data.
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
