lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Oct]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/3] IMA: move read/write counters into struct inode
From
Date
On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 17:15 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 16:38 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > * Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Executive summary of the day's work:
> > > > Yesterday morning: 944 bytes per inode in core
> > > > Yesterday night: 24 bytes per inode in core
> > > > Tonight: 4 bytes per inode in core.
> > > >
> > > > That's a x236 time reduction in memory usage. No I didn't even start looking
> > > > at a freezer. Which could bring that 4 down to 0, but would add a scalability
> > > > penalty on all inodes when IMA was enabled.
> > >
> > > Why not use inode->i_security intelligently? That already exists so that way
> > > it's 0 bytes.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> >
> > It still wouldn't be 0 bytes since there would be a 1-1 mapping from inode to
> > i_security structs. [...]
>
> Only for IMA-affected files, right?

No, we need to keep the open read counter even for non-IMA-affected
files in case we later determine that it is IMA-affected. That's the 4
bytes I have today, which I said could be eliminated with a freezer that
calculated it when IMA was enabled, but isn't something I'm looking at
right now....

-Eric

-Eric



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-10-20 17:29    [W:3.143 / U:0.564 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site