[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1287323960.1998.360.camel@laptop>
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2010 15:59:20 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>
Cc: eparis@...hat.com, Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ibm.com>,
warthog9@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com, devel@...ts.fedoraprojet.org
Subject: Re: ima: use of radix tree cache indexing == massive waste of
memory?
On Sun, 2010-10-17 at 09:12 -0400, Eric Paris wrote:
> We could split this into 2 structures, thus greatly shrinking the size
> of the structure needed for the default/disabled case,
Well, it does suck it needs to bloat data and code when its effectively
disabled. Isn't there a way to gather this data before we enable it, eg.
scan the files list on enable or somesuch?
I mean, if you mandate an external storage you might as well extend
struct inode, that's cheaper in each respect.
Me, I'm henceforth making sure to have CONFIG_IMA disabled...
> but it doesn't
> help the fact that the suggested structure for storage (the radix
> tree) is apparently quite inefficient. I'd love to hear other
> suggestions for a better structure....
radix tree is efficient for dense sets, not sparse sets.
--
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