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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B97EAC433E0 for ; Fri, 15 May 2020 08:26:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C5CB206F1 for ; Fri, 15 May 2020 08:26:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=mykernel.net header.i=cgxu519@mykernel.net header.b="TI33a0FF" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726725AbgEOI0k (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 May 2020 04:26:40 -0400 Received: from sender2-of-o52.zoho.com.cn ([163.53.93.247]:21152 "EHLO sender2-of-o52.zoho.com.cn" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726727AbgEOI0k (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 May 2020 04:26:40 -0400 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1589531144; cv=none; d=zoho.com.cn; s=zohoarc; b=ixFbuSBPPVCG6ruwRqaLDPMMYnO3GDMoccu9a2/5uxO0Iawht3Aa7XEGc8qvWutIF5YD4Yf1dv7GBXgS+OUWyFVtvzM1YWdCSzSZrRNCHv/qcbYSpQSarmwqWQUemHuIOukWfzBz69xS3a4mZ3uJf2oKmm7YYw0VG4rkTGid1wg= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zoho.com.cn; s=zohoarc; t=1589531144; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:From:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Reply-To:References:Subject:To; bh=v1j7yEUJl56Wd+AibdnWdMvB5tgV4YAFK3rS7smIP0g=; b=Yo6KoS5jfWndY1sPxgn2P3MS8BjC2kPHNglNzvW/Kr8IJNWUoBdHvq3PybPKe1cJMnm6wN8RN5zr9njVeNzqUYmT4bCZAjk+CvkEifo6mHPBVZcsMJpjGb8ENbo697GmyZC19NbtwPFhuG/cw/gFJzaV/cX96MKUJKDuzvKqbWM= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zoho.com.cn; dkim=pass header.i=mykernel.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cgxu519@mykernel.net; dmarc=pass header.from= header.from= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1589531144; s=zohomail; d=mykernel.net; i=cgxu519@mykernel.net; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=v1j7yEUJl56Wd+AibdnWdMvB5tgV4YAFK3rS7smIP0g=; b=TI33a0FFY0CCfXG7PMfm8QQgL08VL1d+0dpF0IHSw32OU0zUnsPh9vFScdP3Nap2 rJnvF5SH2ItAkWXgCfArrFYw474F0CYXOG5Cwc0+F+DuCeYgw4r+9WNCGDLocNNLfhs 7KJcdt1ZMYxwDPYacblo57I3BxF3U1afYnqnZ9go= Received: from mail.baihui.com by mx.zoho.com.cn with SMTP id 1589531142535211.24543515194716; Fri, 15 May 2020 16:25:42 +0800 (CST) Date: Fri, 15 May 2020 16:25:42 +0800 From: Chengguang Xu Reply-To: cgxu519@mykernel.net To: "Amir Goldstein" Cc: "Miklos Szeredi" , "Al Viro" , "linux-fsdevel" , "overlayfs" Message-ID: <17217706984.f5e20fe88512.8363313618084688988@mykernel.net> In-Reply-To: References: <20200515072047.31454-1-cgxu519@mykernel.net> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 0/9] Suppress negative dentry MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Importance: Medium User-Agent: ZohoCN Mail X-Mailer: ZohoCN Mail Sender: linux-unionfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org ---- =E5=9C=A8 =E6=98=9F=E6=9C=9F=E4=BA=94, 2020-05-15 15:30:27 Amir Golds= tein =E6=92=B0=E5=86=99 ---- > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 10:21 AM Chengguang Xu wr= ote: > > > > This series adds a new lookup flag LOOKUP_DONTCACHE_NEGATIVE > > to indicate to drop negative dentry in slow path of lookup. > > > > In overlayfs, negative dentries in upper/lower layers are useless > > after construction of overlayfs' own dentry, so in order to > > effectively reclaim those dentries, specify LOOKUP_DONTCACHE_NEGATIVE > > flag when doing lookup in upper/lower layers. > > > > Patch 1 adds flag LOOKUP_DONTCACHE_NEGATIVE and related logic in vfs l= ayer. > > Patch 2 does lookup optimazation for overlayfs. > > Patch 3-9 just adjusts function argument when calling > > lookup_positive_unlocked() and lookup_one_len_unlocked(). >=20 > Hmm you cannot do that, build must not be broken mid series. > When Miklos said split he meant to patch 1 and 2. > Patch 1 must convert all callers to the new argument list, > at which point all overlayfs calls are with 0 flags. >=20 > Once that's done, you may add: > Reviewed-by: Amir Goldstein >=20 OK, I got it, I'll still wait for a while in case of other feedbacks. Miklos, AI I'm not sure this series will go into whose tree in the end,=20 so I just rebased on current linus-tree, any suggestion for the code base? Thanks, cgxu