| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 11:58:39 +1000 From: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com> To: Tom Spink <tspink@...il.com> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, xfs@....sgi.com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] On-demand Filesystem Initialisation On Sun, Jun 01, 2008 at 03:51:53PM +0100, Tom Spink wrote: > > (resend to include CCs) What cc's? Still no xfs cc on it. I added it to this reply.... > This (short) patch series is another RFC for the patch that introduces on-demand > filesystem initialisation. In addition to the original infrastructure > implementation (with clean-ups), it changes XFS to use this new infrastructure. > > I wrote a toy filesystem (testfs) to simulate scheduling/allocation delays and > to torture the mount/unmount cycles. I didn't manage to deadlock the system > in my tests. XFS also works as expected aswell, in that the global threads > are not created until an XFS filesystem is mounted for the first time. When the > last XFS filesystem is unmounted, the threads go away. > > Please let me know what you think! Why even bother? This is why we have /modular/ kernels - if you're not using XFS then don't load it and you won't see those pesky threads. That'll save on a bunch of memory as well because the xfs module ain't small (>480k on i386).... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@...morbit.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists