[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090603063815.GE27563@wotan.suse.de>
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 08:38:15 +0200
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...stanetworks.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/23] vfs: Introduce infrastructure for revoking a file
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 03:56:02PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de> writes:
>
> >> In addition for a complete solution we need:
> >> - A reliable way the file structures that we need to revoke.
> >> - To wait for but not tamper with ongoing file creation and cleanup.
> >> - A guarantee that all with user space controlled duration are removed.
> >>
> >> The file_hotplug_lock has a very unique implementation necessitated by
> >> the need to have no performance impact on existing code. Classic locking
> >
> > Well, it isn't no performance impact. Function calls, branches, icache
> > and dcache...
>
> Practically none.
OK that's different from none. There is obviously overhead.
--
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