Re: [patch 0/9] extended fdinfo via procfs series, v7

[Cyrill Gorcunov]

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.

Btw, Bruce, I forgot to mention that Linus and Andrew asked us to wrap
all code related to c/r we bring in with CONFIG_CHECKPOINT_RESTORE symbol.
So while wrapping show_fdinfo member in file_operations with CONFIG might
be an overhead (as Al and Pavel pointed me) the fhandle in mark is reverse,
a good candidate for CONFIG wrapping I think.

	Cyrill
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/