Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 24 Apr 2001 22:45:59 +0200 | From | Erik Mouw <> | Subject | Re: hundreds of mount --bind mountpoints? |
| |
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 12:47:38PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote: > While I applaud your initiative, you made an unfortunate choice of > filesystems to convert. The iso_inode_info is only 4*__u32, as is > proc_inode_info. Given that we still need to keep a pointer to the > external info structs, and the overhead of the slab cache itself > (both CPU usage and memory overhead, however small), I don't think > it is worthwhile to have isofs and procfs in separate slabs.
Well, I know a little bit about procfs because I'm currently documenting it, so that's why I picked it first. After I got the idea, isofs was quite easy.
In retrospect it would have been more effective to pick a filesystem with a larger *_inode_info field, but then again: Al is right. Struct inode is cluttered with *_inode_info fields, while we use anonymous data entries in other parts of the kernel (like the data pointer in struct proc_dir_entry, or the priv pointer in struct net_device).
There is another advantage: suppose you're hacking on a filesystem and change it's *_fs_i.h header. With Al's proposal you only have to recompile the filesystem you're hacking on, while you have to recompile the complete kernel in the current situation.
Erik
-- J.A.K. (Erik) Mouw, Information and Communication Theory Group, Department of Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Information Technology and Systems, Delft University of Technology, PO BOX 5031, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands Phone: +31-15-2783635 Fax: +31-15-2781843 Email: J.A.K.Mouw@its.tudelft.nl WWW: http://www-ict.its.tudelft.nl/~erik/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |