[lkml]   [2004]   [Jan]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [autofs] [RFC] Towards a Modern Autofs
Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Mike Waychison wrote:
>> To put it into perspective, the I'm calling for the following major
>> changes:
> [...]
>> 2) move the loop that used to spin around and ask kernelspace if there
>> was anything to expire into the VFS as well, where it won't be killed.
> [...]
>> (1) and (2) shouldn't be hard at all to do considering David Howells
>> has done the majority of this already. (3) is needed in order to
>> manage direct mounts properly for when they are 'covered'.
>> Admittedly, (4) comes off as an ugly hack.
>> Also, (2) was the only 'active' task the automount daemon was doing.
>> Everything else it did can be rewritten in the form of a usermode
>> helper that runs only when it is needed. This simplifies the
>> userspace code a lot.
> Just going by your own explanation here, #2 should not be in the kernel.
> If we moving daemons into the kernel just because they won't be killed,
> we'll have Oracle in-kernel before you know it. Completely spurious
> reason.

You wouldn't put a bdflush daemon in userspace either would you? The
loop in question is just that; (overly simplified):

while (1) {
f = ask_kernel_if_anything_looks_inactive();
if (f) {
} else {
sleep(x seconds);

My point is, if this is the only active action done by userspace, why
open it up to being broken?

Mike Waychison
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
1 (650) 352-5299 voice
1 (416) 202-8336 voice
mailto: Michael.Waychison@Sun.COM

NOTICE: The opinions expressed in this email are held by me,
and may not represent the views of Sun Microsystems, Inc.
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:59    [W:0.066 / U:3.248 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site