From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from jazzdrum.ncsc.mil (zombie.ncsc.mil [144.51.88.131]) by tarius.tycho.ncsc.mil (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k6RFcq3F024476 for ; Thu, 27 Jul 2006 11:38:52 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (jazzdrum.ncsc.mil [144.51.5.7]) by jazzdrum.ncsc.mil (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id k6RFcnCo023379 for ; Thu, 27 Jul 2006 15:38:50 GMT Message-ID: <44C8DE0A.1080400@mentalrootkit.com> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 11:38:50 -0400 From: Karl MacMillan MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Moore CC: selinux@tycho.nsa.gov Subject: Re: Converting ebitmaps to copy-on-write? References: <44C788CA.8040907@hp.com> In-Reply-To: <44C788CA.8040907@hp.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Sender: owner-selinux@tycho.nsa.gov List-Id: selinux@tycho.nsa.gov Paul Moore wrote: > Can anyone think of reason why converting the ebitmap code to a copy on > write scheme would be a bad idea? Yes, there would be some overhead in > maintaining reference counts but I suspect the added overhead would be > more than offset by the reduction in kmalloc() calls ... thoughts? > > Which ebitmaps are shared enough for this to help? I don't think I have enough context to know whether this would be a good idea or not. Karl -- This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list. If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@tycho.nsa.gov with the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.