hi there,
> On Thursday 17 October 2002 00:48, Nathan Scott wrote:
> > They are an optimisization for the one special case (posix acls),
> > and manage to pollute the VFS for that one special case ...
> ...
> As soon as any filesystem independent part of the kernel needs an interface
> more efficient that pass-by-value we will again have exactly the same
> problem.
My point is simply that a proposal to extend the VFS in this way needs
to be accompanied by a compelling argument showing the performance bump
that its providing.
> Going to disk and fetching EAs only causes disk accesses once; afterwards the
> block is cached.
Good - this is true for both XFS and ext2/3 then. So, we are talking about
using ref counting vs. copying for any in-kernel users of attrs, and you're
saying there is some significant overheads with copying and I'm saying show
me what kind of overheads we're talking about, please.
cheers.
-- Nathan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/