| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20101101171126.1194e2b0@linux.intel.com> Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 17:11:26 +0000 From: Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com> To: Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com> Cc: Samu Onkalo <samu.p.onkalo@...ia.com>, gregkh@...e.de, hmh@....eng.br, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] device-core: sysfs open - close notify > Your patch may cause many unnecessary memory waste because > most of drivers does not need attribute file .open/.close notifier. Firstly there are not that many driver objects in a small system so it wouldn't take that much to shift the balance the other way. Secondly its becoming clear that every time a driver goes to runtime pm these issues come up - even with things like configuration values for drivers that need to wake the hardware and then silence it. So the whole sysfs/open thing is going to keep haunting us with runtime pm, the question is where to put the callbacks so we don't bloat stuff. Clearly not per attribute or per sysfs node. One possibility would be with the runtime pm stuff, but that would need a clean reliable way to go sysfs->device->runtime_pm There are also obvious hackish ways to handle it like passing a 0 length read to indicate close etc - they save memory but they are asking for problems in future. -- 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