[lkml]   [1996]   [Nov]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: RFC: New kernel proc interface
On Fri, 1 Nov 1996, Rob Riggs wrote:

> On 01-Nov-96 wrote:
> >> The problems described above are easily solved by allowing the
> >> proc routines to write out all their data in one shot, and
> >> caching that data for the user programs.
> >
> >Not always. The ip routing tables could be 40,000 routes or more. Which at
> >80 bytes a route is 3.2Mb of data to cache !
> >
> >Alan
> Is that really a problem? Isn't the trade-off worth the RAM
> requirements? I knew that this would be brought up when I
> decided that caching the data was necessary, but it is a
> reasonable approach. If you want the data pulled out of
> proc to be consistent, atomicity is necessary.
> Besides, the data is cached only while the file is held open.
> When the file is closed, all that memory is freed. 3.2MB is
> a pitance today. Anyone that is using 40K routes can afford
> the US$12 for another 4MB.

Does your process handle the case where the requesting program fails to
close the file?

John Alvord

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:37    [W:0.135 / U:0.796 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site