From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01065C4332F for ; Sun, 3 Oct 2021 13:52:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB9DE619E9 for ; Sun, 3 Oct 2021 13:52:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230385AbhJCNyV (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Oct 2021 09:54:21 -0400 Received: from zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk ([142.44.231.140]:51004 "EHLO zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230050AbhJCNyU (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Oct 2021 09:54:20 -0400 Received: from viro by zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1mX1um-009e19-Ft; Sun, 03 Oct 2021 13:52:28 +0000 Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2021 13:52:28 +0000 From: Al Viro To: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi Cc: Shreeya Patel , tytso@mit.edu, adilger.kernel@dilger.ca, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel@collabora.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] fs: dcache: Handle case-exact lookup in d_alloc_parallel Message-ID: References: <0b8fd2677b797663bfcb97f6aa108193fedf9767.1632909358.git.shreeya.patel@collabora.com> <87a6js61aj.fsf@collabora.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87a6js61aj.fsf@collabora.com> Sender: Al Viro Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Oct 01, 2021 at 02:35:32PM -0400, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote: > I don't like the idea of having a flavor of a dentry comparison function > that doesn't invoke d_compare. In particular because d_compare might be > used for all sorts of things, and this fix is really specific to the > case-insensitive case. > > Would it be possible to fold this change into generic_ci_d_compare? If > we could flag the dentry as part of a parallel lookup under the relevant > condition, generic_ci_d_compare could simply return immediately in > such case. Not really - if anything, that's a property of d_alloc_parallel() call done by d_add_ci(), not that of any of the dentries involved...