git.notmuchmail.org Git - notmuch/blob - test/corpora/lkml/cur/1382298587.001970:2,

   1 From: Suresh Jayaraman <sjayaraman-l3A5Bk7waGM@public.gmane.org>
   2 Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 04/10] cifs: define server-level cache index objects
   3  and register them with FS-Cache
   4 Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 11:04:39 +0530
   5 Lines: 61
   6 Message-ID: <4C219CEF.5000003@suse.de>
   7 References: <yes>       <1277220198-3522-1-git-send-email-sjayaraman@suse.de> <20100622175214.4c56234f@corrin.poochiereds.net>
   8 Mime-Version: 1.0
   9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
  10 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
  11 Cc: Steve French <smfrench-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>, linux-cifs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
  12         linux-fsdevel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
  13         David Howells <dhowells-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
  14 To: Jeff Layton <jlayton-vpEMnDpepFuMZCB2o+C8xQ@public.gmane.org>
  15 X-From: linux-cifs-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org Wed Jun 23 07:34:50 2010
  16 Return-path: <linux-cifs-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>
  17 Envelope-to: glkc-linux-cifs-1dZseelyfdZg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org
  18 Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67])
  19         by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
  20         (envelope-from <linux-cifs-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>)
  21         id 1ORIbp-0002v4-3W
  22         for glkc-linux-cifs-1dZseelyfdZg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org; Wed, 23 Jun 2010 07:34:49 +0200
  23 Received: (majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
  24         id S1750954Ab0FWFes (ORCPT <rfc822;glkc-linux-cifs@m.gmane.org>);
  25         Wed, 23 Jun 2010 01:34:48 -0400
  26 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:58263 "EHLO mx2.suse.de"
  27         rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
  28         id S1750809Ab0FWFes (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-cifs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>);
  29         Wed, 23 Jun 2010 01:34:48 -0400
  30 Received: from relay1.suse.de (charybdis-ext.suse.de [195.135.221.2])
  31         by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C18386A2E;
  32         Wed, 23 Jun 2010 07:34:46 +0200 (CEST)
  33 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091130 SUSE/3.0.0-1.1.1 Thunderbird/3.0
  34 In-Reply-To: <20100622175214.4c56234f-4QP7MXygkU+dMjc06nkz3ljfA9RmPOcC@public.gmane.org>
  35 Sender: linux-cifs-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
  36 Precedence: bulk
  37 List-ID: <linux-cifs.vger.kernel.org>
  38 X-Mailing-List: linux-cifs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
  39 Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1001998>
  40
  41 On 06/23/2010 03:22 AM, Jeff Layton wrote:
  42 > On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:53:18 +0530
  43 > Suresh Jayaraman <sjayaraman-l3A5Bk7waGM@public.gmane.org> wrote:
  44 >
  45 >> Define server-level cache index objects (as managed by TCP_ServerInfo structs).
  46 >> Each server object is created in the CIFS top-level index object and is itself
  47 >> an index into which superblock-level objects are inserted.
  48 >>
  49 >> Currently, the server objects are keyed by hostname.
  50 >>
  51 >> Signed-off-by: Suresh Jayaraman <sjayaraman-l3A5Bk7waGM@public.gmane.org>
  52 >> ---
  53 >>  fs/cifs/Makefile   |    2 +-
  54 >>  fs/cifs/cache.c    |   25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
  55 >>  fs/cifs/cifsglob.h |    3 +++
  56 >>  fs/cifs/connect.c  |    4 ++++
  57 >>  fs/cifs/fscache.c  |   47 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
  58 >>  fs/cifs/fscache.h  |   12 ++++++++++++
  59 >>  6 files changed, 92 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
  60 >>  create mode 100644 fs/cifs/fscache.c
  61 >>
  62 >> Index: cifs-2.6/fs/cifs/Makefile
  63 >> ===================================================================
  64 >> --- cifs-2.6.orig/fs/cifs/Makefile
  65 >> +++ cifs-2.6/fs/cifs/Makefile
  66 >> @@ -12,4 +12,4 @@ cifs-$(CONFIG_CIFS_UPCALL) += cifs_spneg
  67 >>
  68 >>  cifs-$(CONFIG_CIFS_DFS_UPCALL) += dns_resolve.o cifs_dfs_ref.o
  69 >>
  70 >> -cifs-$(CONFIG_CIFS_FSCACHE) += cache.o
  71 >> +cifs-$(CONFIG_CIFS_FSCACHE) += fscache.o cache.o
  72 >> Index: cifs-2.6/fs/cifs/cache.c
  73 >> ===================================================================
  74 >> --- cifs-2.6.orig/fs/cifs/cache.c
  75 >> +++ cifs-2.6/fs/cifs/cache.c
  76 >> @@ -51,3 +51,28 @@ void cifs_fscache_unregister(void)
  77 >>      fscache_unregister_netfs(&cifs_fscache_netfs);
  78 >>  }
  79 >>
  80 >> +/*
  81 >> + * Server object currently keyed by hostname
  82 >> + */
  83 >> +static uint16_t cifs_server_get_key(const void *cookie_netfs_data,
  84 >> +                               void *buffer, uint16_t maxbuf)
  85 >> +{
  86 >> +    const struct TCP_Server_Info *server = cookie_netfs_data;
  87 >> +    uint16_t len = strnlen(server->hostname, sizeof(server->hostname));
  88 >> +
  89 >
  90 > Would a tuple of address/family/port be a better choice here? Imagine I
  91 > mount "foo" and then later mount "foor.bar.baz". If they are the same
  92 > address and only the UNC differs, then you won't get the benefit of
  93 > the cache, right?
  94 >
  95
  96 Good point. I'll fix it up when I do a respin.
  97
  98 Thanks,
  99
 100 --
 101 Suresh Jayaraman
 102
 103