[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1204206954.31790.64.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil>
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 08:55:54 -0500
From: Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>
To: James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
Cc: "David P. Quigley" <dpquigl@...ho.nsa.gov>, hch@...radead.org,
viro@....linux.org.uk, trond.myklebust@....uio.no,
bfields@...ldses.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/11] NFSv4: Add label recommended attribute and NFSv4
flags
On Thu, 2008-02-28 at 12:52 +1100, James Morris wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Feb 2008, David P. Quigley wrote:
>
> > +#define NFS4_MAXLABELLEN 255
>
> I remember raising this before, but I think we need to try and find a
> better way to implement this than always allocating labels of a fixed and
> possibly too-small size.
>
> What about perhaps starting with a statically allocated array of say 64
> bytes (I can't see any labels on my system larger than that), and then
> falling back to a a dynamic allocation of up to 32k if it turns out to be
> too small ? i.e. large labels are a slow path and there is no practical
> limit on label size.
Yes, that would be my preference as well - there shouldn't be any
internal limits on the label size.
--
Stephen Smalley
National Security Agency
--
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