-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.8k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Linux does not HAVE_DNLC #8031
Merged
Merged
Linux does not HAVE_DNLC #8031
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Since Linux does not have the Directory Name Lookup Cache, we don't need the code to manage it. Signed-off-by: Matthew Ahrens <[email protected]>
richardelling
approved these changes
Oct 17, 2018
behlendorf
approved these changes
Oct 17, 2018
ahrens
added
Status: Accepted
Ready to integrate (reviewed, tested)
and removed
Status: Code Review Needed
Ready for review and testing
labels
Oct 17, 2018
dweeezil
approved these changes
Oct 17, 2018
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've been wondering for some time whether we (ZoL) would ever remove some of this dead (for ZoL) code. LGTM, but I'll also point out the following might also be candidates:
HAVE_KSID
HAVE_MLSLABEL
HAVE_SPA_THREAD
HAVE_UIO_ZEROCOPY
gmelikov
approved these changes
Oct 17, 2018
@dweeezil thanks, I was missing a couple of those from my list. |
BrainSlayer
pushed a commit
to BrainSlayer/zfs
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 18, 2018
Since Linux does not have the Directory Name Lookup Cache, we don't need the code to manage it. Reviewed-by: Brian Behlendorf <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Tim Chase <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: George Melikov <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Richard Elling <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Matthew Ahrens <[email protected]> Closes openzfs#8031
ghfields
pushed a commit
to ghfields/zfs
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 29, 2018
Since Linux does not have the Directory Name Lookup Cache, we don't need the code to manage it. Reviewed-by: Brian Behlendorf <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Tim Chase <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: George Melikov <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Richard Elling <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Matthew Ahrens <[email protected]> Closes openzfs#8031
GregorKopka
pushed a commit
to GregorKopka/zfs
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 7, 2019
Since Linux does not have the Directory Name Lookup Cache, we don't need the code to manage it. Reviewed-by: Brian Behlendorf <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Tim Chase <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: George Melikov <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Richard Elling <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Matthew Ahrens <[email protected]> Closes openzfs#8031
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Motivation and Context
Since Linux does not have the Directory Name Lookup Cache, we don't need
the code to manage it. The HAVE_DNLC CPP macro is never defined.
Note that if upstream (illumos) changes are made relating to the DNLC, we will have merge conflicts. But that was probably the case already, and having merge conflicts in areas where the functionality differs is a good thing because it brings our attention to changes that require more thought.
Carrying this dead code has more cost than benefit, and if we ever decide we need it, we can revive it by reverting this commit.
Description
Remove code that's under HAVE_DNLC.
How Has This Been Tested?
build.
Types of changes
Checklist:
Signed-off-by
.