From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161187AbXCGBry (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Mar 2007 20:47:54 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161198AbXCGBrx (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Mar 2007 20:47:53 -0500 Received: from x35.xmailserver.org ([64.71.152.41]:42333 "EHLO x35.xmailserver.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161187AbXCGBrw (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Mar 2007 20:47:52 -0500 X-AuthUser: davidel@xmailserver.org Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2007 17:47:33 -0800 (PST) From: Davide Libenzi X-X-Sender: davide@alien.or.mcafeemobile.com To: Linus Torvalds cc: Avi Kivity , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andrew Morton , Al Viro Subject: Re: [patch] epoll use a single inode ... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <45ED1A3C.6030707@argo.co.il> X-GPG-FINGRPRINT: CFAE 5BEE FD36 F65E E640 56FE 0974 BF23 270F 474E X-GPG-PUBLIC_KEY: http://www.xmailserver.org/davidel.asc MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 6 Mar 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Tue, 6 Mar 2007, Davide Libenzi wrote: > > > > I'm OK with everything that avoid code duplication due to those fake > > inodes. The change can be localized inside the existing API, so it doesn't > > really affect me externally. > > Can you try with the first patch version that doesn't do anything special > at all, and just uses a single dentry. > > Yeah, the dentry name will be identical, and so you would see something > like "7 -> signalfd:signalfd" when you do "ls -l /proc//fd/" on a > task that has such a special file descriptor (with no way to tell > different timerfd's and signalfd's apart), but I think it's better to > start off simple than to overdesign things. > > And trying to tell them apart sounds a bit like overdesign, if only > because I really don't see why anybody would really *care*. So it's a > timer for poll/select/epoll - why care about anything else? The code would not change/shrink much with the single dentry. We'd save memory, and we'd lose the capability of seeing aino:[CLASS]. Both ways are fine with me. - Davide