[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120823172849.GA15362@moon>
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 21:28:49 +0400
From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...nvz.org>
To: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>,
James Bottomley <jbottomley@...allels.com>,
Matthew Helsley <matt.helsley@...il.com>,
aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [patch 0/9] extended fdinfo via procfs series, v7
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 04:44:27PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 08:23:18AM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 02:43:23PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> > > Hi guys,
> > >
> > > here is updated version of the fdinfo via procfs series,
> > > the changes from previous one are the following
> > >
> > > - fhandle is carried inside inotify mark but this feature
> > > is CONFIG dependent to not bloat the kernel for users
> > > who don't need it
> >
> > As Al points out, this doesn't help much: if this feature is something a
> > distro will want to provide, then in practice all their users are
> > eventually going to end up with it turned on.
> >
>
> Yes, I remember what Al has said, the problem is that this data attached
> to inotify mark is not just a couple of bytes but rather about 136 bytes
> per mark, and encoding this fhandle will take some cycles on mark creation
> as well. Thus when in a sake of c/r we simply have no other way and are
> to pay some trade off cost for c/r functionality, i don't think the
> regular users (and note that CONFIG_CHECKPOINT_RESTORE is off by default)
> should pay same cost for nothing. That's why I made it config dependant.
> Again if you still think that making it config-option is a bad idea I'll
> rip this symbols off, it's not a problem.
Btw, Bruce, I forgot to mention that Linus and Andrew asked us to wrap
all code related to c/r we bring in with CONFIG_CHECKPOINT_RESTORE symbol.
So while wrapping show_fdinfo member in file_operations with CONFIG might
be an overhead (as Al and Pavel pointed me) the fhandle in mark is reverse,
a good candidate for CONFIG wrapping I think.
Cyrill
--
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