[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080621084440.GA25489@ca-server1.us.oracle.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 01:44:40 -0700
From: Joel Becker <Joel.Becker@...cle.com>
To: Ben Nizette <bn@...sdigital.com>
Cc: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...il.com>,
linux-wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
linux kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
Satyam Sharma <ssatyam@....iitk.ac.in>,
Felix Fietkau <nbd@...nwrt.org>,
Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCHES] Re: Is configfs the right solution for
configuration based fs?
On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 06:03:42PM +1000, Ben Nizette wrote:
> In the kobject/kset case the separation makes sense as kobjects are
> embedded in things all over the kernel controlling things like ref
> counting, device model glue, hotplug info as well as the sysfs
> representation. The config_item doesn't have any responsibilities
> outside of the configfs representation (does it?) so the analogy isn't
> 100%. Though of course the item/group split makes sense if there are
> grander plans for the config_item in the future.
The config_item is indeed embedded in whatever struct it maps
too. eg, the ocfs2 nodemanager can have a couple hundred nodes, and
that's one config_item per. The fs/dlm stuff can have even more nodes.
Joel
--
Life's Little Instruction Book #222
"Think twice before burdening a friend with a secret."
Joel Becker
Principal Software Developer
Oracle
E-mail: joel.becker@...cle.com
Phone: (650) 506-8127
--
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