Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 23:02:48 +0800 From: "Howard Su" <howard0su@gmail.com> To: "Eric Anderson" <anderson@freebsd.org> Cc: fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: size limit for TMPFS Message-ID: <f126fae00705180802q2b13adb5h2fcec8ab8ffbe00d@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <464DA5B7.1000908@freebsd.org> References: <f126fae00705170236t687a92des3f42415fd06d75b9@mail.gmail.com> <464C3DA7.3020003@freebsd.org> <f126fae00705172328k6927fb67r3bd27731209b2661@mail.gmail.com> <464DA5B7.1000908@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 5/18/07, Eric Anderson <anderson@freebsd.org> wrote: > On 05/18/07 01:28, Howard Su wrote: > From a quick glance, you are storing your inode count in the mount > structure of the tmpfs. So, anytime you do anything with the fs, you > have to lock the mount struct anyway, so there's no additional mutex > when updating the block count vs inode count, right? Please correct me > if I'm wrong here, since I'm still learning much about locking/vfs/etc. You are right in one persipective. the memory consumed by inode can be counted in this way. However when we allocate the filename, dirent, you need acquire the mutex which is not needed currently. -- -Howard
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?f126fae00705180802q2b13adb5h2fcec8ab8ffbe00d>