Posted Aug 25, 2005 18:18 UTC (Thu) by daniel
In reply to: Memory?
Parent article: Configfs - an introduction
I remember complains about sysfs taking too much memory. I am afraid configfs will be the same.
Yes, currently configfs is a memory pig because all its directory inodes are pinned in memory, see my post:
Wouldn't it be better to merge sysfs and configfs into one to have both properties, viewing and setting/configurating?
Indeed. All configfs does is take instantiation events via the filesystem instead of, e.g., the hotplug system as sysfs does. In fact, configfs is just cut & paste of the sysfs code with some special case code here and there to handle the different event source. Except for initialization, the data structures are identical. Nearly all of sysfs is still there in configfs. Hmm, what is the code trying to tell us? I'm checking right now to see how easy it is to put this forked code back together so that a kernel module can specify whether it wants user-driven directory creation or not. Oddly enough, the maintainers think this is hard, but I will see for myself.
to post comments)