On Mon, 2005-08-15 at 15:06 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 04:02:03PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > Dave Kleikamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > jfs no longer uses a directory inode's address space. Clean up the > > > code by removing aops for directories altogether > > > > Wouldn't it be better to allow prefetch on directories? > > After all there is a reason earlykdm does that.
I don't have a suse system in front of me, but doesn't earlykdm preload files within those directories? I would think that in most cases, the directories will be prefetched as a result of preloading those files. > > It's a bit diffcult. Most filesystems (at least ext3, xfs and jfs) > don't use the inode's address space for directories but the address_space > of the underlying block device (or in the xfs case an xfs-private one > covering the whole block device), so that readahead would have to happen > on the block device node after finding out where the directory is placed. exactly. the sys_readahead interface doesn't lend itself to working with directories. Directory inodes would need a dummy set of aops, and I don't think the benefit would be worth the complexity. -- David Kleikamp IBM Linux Technology Center ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf _______________________________________________ Jfs-discussion mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jfs-discussion
