From: Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@in.ibm.com>
To: Patrick Mochel <mochel@osdl.org>
Cc: Maneesh Soni <maneesh@in.ibm.com>,
Al Viro <viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk>,
Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <CBORNTRA@de.ibm.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/5] Backing Store for sysfs (Overhauled)
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 01:25:26 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20031113195526.GD1773@in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0311131127170.11822-100000@cherise>
On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 11:34:04AM -0800, Patrick Mochel wrote:
>
> I still think that keeping the directories static and only creating the
> leaf (file) dentries dynamically is the best tradeoff between complexity
> and memory consumption.
Sounds like after the locking in the current patches fixed, this
should perhaps be implemented and compared for locking complexity
and memory consumption.
>
> It will require some minor infrastructural modification to associate a
> kobject with all of its leaf nodes, but the result will be cleaner, and
> the worst-case memory consumption will be less than your patches with a
> per-attribute-per-kobject data structure (which there currently isn't).
Would a smaller replacement for the sysfs_dirent structure to link
just leaf nodes to kobject be close to what infrastructural
modifications you are talking about ?
Thanks
Dipankar
prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-11-13 19:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-11-12 12:23 [RFC 0/5] Backing Store for sysfs (Overhauled) Maneesh Soni
2003-11-12 12:25 ` [RFC 1/5] sysfs-backing-store.patch Maneesh Soni
2003-11-12 12:25 ` [RFC 2/5] sysfs-dir.patch Maneesh Soni
2003-11-12 12:25 ` [RFC 3/5] sysfs-file.patch Maneesh Soni
2003-11-12 12:26 ` [RFC 4/5] sysfs-attr_group.patch Maneesh Soni
2003-11-12 12:26 ` [RFC 5/5] sysfs-symlink.patch Maneesh Soni
2003-11-12 14:39 ` [RFC 2/5] sysfs-dir.patch viro
2003-11-12 16:00 ` [RFC 0/5] Backing Store for sysfs (Overhauled) Greg KH
2003-11-12 16:27 ` Dipankar Sarma
2003-11-12 16:39 ` Greg KH
2003-11-13 19:34 ` Patrick Mochel
2003-11-13 19:55 ` Dipankar Sarma [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20031113195526.GD1773@in.ibm.com \
--to=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=CBORNTRA@de.ibm.com \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maneesh@in.ibm.com \
--cc=mochel@osdl.org \
--cc=viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox