From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "J. Bruce Fields" Subject: Re: [patch 0/9] extended fdinfo via procfs series, v7 Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 09:52:34 -0400 Message-ID: <20120823135234.GE29943@fieldses.org> References: <20120823104323.040550004@openvz.org> <20120823122318.GD29943@fieldses.org> <20120823124427.GD1992@moon> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Al Viro , Alexey Dobriyan , Andrew Morton , Pavel Emelyanov , James Bottomley , Matthew Helsley , aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com To: Cyrill Gorcunov Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120823124427.GD1992@moon> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 04:44:27PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: > On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 08:23:18AM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 02:43:23PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: > > > Hi guys, > > > > > > here is updated version of the fdinfo via procfs series, > > > the changes from previous one are the following > > > > > > - fhandle is carried inside inotify mark but this feature > > > is CONFIG dependent to not bloat the kernel for users > > > who don't need it > > > > As Al points out, this doesn't help much: if this feature is something a > > distro will want to provide, then in practice all their users are > > eventually going to end up with it turned on. > > > > Yes, I remember what Al has said, the problem is that this data attached > to inotify mark is not just a couple of bytes but rather about 136 bytes > per mark, and encoding this fhandle will take some cycles on mark creation > as well. Thus when in a sake of c/r we simply have no other way and are > to pay some trade off cost for c/r functionality, i don't think the > regular users (and note that CONFIG_CHECKPOINT_RESTORE is off by default) > should pay same cost for nothing. That's why I made it config dependant. > Again if you still think that making it config-option is a bad idea I'll > rip this symbols off, it's not a problem. I don't have any opinion on whether there should be a configuration option. Just want to make sure the cost when it's turned on is still taken seriously. --b. > > > Could you quantify the cost somehow? > > > > About 136 bytes per inotify mark. > > > I wonder if you could get away with something less than MAX_HANDLE_SIZE? > > 128 bytes is the maximum allowable by NFSv4. In practice I don't think > > any of our filesystems need more than 40 or so right now. > > Look, Bruce, I would like to follow the limits we have #define'd in kernel, > because it makes code easier to support. I can #define some limit for > inotify fhandle but what should I print in fdinfo if say there is no > space left in buffer? > > Cyrill