[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091029192414.GN10555@parisc-linux.org>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 13:24:14 -0600
From: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
To: Tejun Heo <teheo@...e.de>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Sysfs: Allow directories to be populated dynamically
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 05:28:14PM +0100, Tejun Heo wrote:
> struct sysfs_dirent {
> atomic_t s_count;
> atomic_t s_active;
> struct sysfs_dirent *s_parent;
> struct sysfs_dirent *s_sibling;
> const char *s_name;
>
> union {
> struct sysfs_elem_dir s_dir;
> struct sysfs_elem_symlink s_symlink;
> struct sysfs_elem_attr s_attr;
> struct sysfs_elem_bin_attr s_bin_attr;
> };
>
> unsigned int s_flags;
> ino_t s_ino;
> umode_t s_mode;
> struct sysfs_inode_attrs *s_iattr;
> ^^
Oh, ouch. That does change the calculus somewhat.
> It feels a bit too convoluted to me. sysfs is already pretty
> convoluted and adding yet more convolution would require pretty good
> justification, so I'm curious about the numbers.
It is convoluted. The advantage of this is that we get to create many
fewer dirents. I wonder if we can do away with the dirents entirely, and
have dentries constructed dynamically instead.
--
Matthew Wilcox Intel Open Source Technology Centre
"Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this
operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such
a retrograde step."
--
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