From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262373AbTJFQJU (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Oct 2003 12:09:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262375AbTJFQJU (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Oct 2003 12:09:20 -0400 Received: from e31.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.129]:10237 "EHLO e31.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262373AbTJFQJO (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Oct 2003 12:09:14 -0400 Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 09:08:46 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Maneesh Soni Cc: Al Viro , Patrick Mochel , LKML , Dipankar Sarma Subject: Re: [RFC 0/6] Backing Store for sysfs Message-ID: <20031006160846.GA4125@us.ibm.com> References: <20031006085915.GE4220@in.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031006085915.GE4220@in.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-Operating-System: Linux 2.6.0-test6-bk5 (i686) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 02:29:15PM +0530, Maneesh Soni wrote: > > 2.6.0-test6 With patches. > ----------------- > dentry_cache (active) 2520 2544 > inode_cache (active) 1058 1050 > LowFree 875032 KB 874748 KB So with these patches we actually eat up more LowFree if all sysfs entries are searched, and make the dentry_cache bigger? That's not good :( Remember, every kobject that's created will cause a call to /sbin/hotplug which will cause udev to walk the sysfs tree to get the information for that kobject. So I don't see any savings in these patches, do you? thanks, greg k-h