[lkml]   [2007]   [Oct]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: per BDI dirty limit (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24)
    On Tue, 2007-10-02 at 13:21 +0200, Kay Sievers wrote:
    > On 10/2/07, Peter Zijlstra <> wrote:
    > > On Tue, 2007-10-02 at 12:31 +0200, Kay Sievers wrote:
    > >
    > > > What would be the point in another top-level tree for device
    > > > information? All devices you are exporting information for, are
    > > > already in the sysfs tree, right?
    > >
    > > Never did find NFS mounts/servers/superblocks or whatever constitutes a
    > > BDI for NFS in there. Same goes for all other networked filesystems for
    > > that matter.
    > How about adding this information to the tree then, instead of
    > creating a new top-level hack, just because something that you think
    > you need doesn't exist.

    So you suggest adding all the various network filesystems in there
    (where?), and adding the concept of a BDI, and ensuring all are properly
    linked together - somehow. Feel free to do so.

    > You called sysfs a mess, seems you work on that topic too. :)

    I called the in-kernel API to create sysfs files a mess. Not that I have
    another opinion on the content of /sys though, always takes to damn long
    to find anything in there.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2007-10-02 13:43    [from the cache]
    ©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean