Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com> writes:

> It's a bit scary tho.  Working inode->i_dentry or dentry->d_alias
> crosses multiple sb's.  sysfs isn't too greedy about dcache/icache.
> Only open files and directories hold them and only single copy of
> sysfs_dirent is there for most nodes.  Wouldn't it be better to stay on
> the safer side and use separate inode hierarchy?

To do that I believe we would need to ensure sysfs does not use 
the inode->i_mutex lock except to keep the VFS layer out.  Allowing us
to safely change the directory structure, without holding it.

You raise a good point about inode->i_dentry and dentry->d_alias.
Generally they are used by fat like filesystems but I am starting to
see uses in generic pieces of code.  I don't see any problems today
but yes it would be good to do the refactoring to allow us to duplicate
the inodes. 

Eric

_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers