LWN.net Logo

Followups: performance counters, ksplice, and fsnotify

Followups: performance counters, ksplice, and fsnotify

Posted Dec 19, 2008 2:54 UTC (Fri) by stevef (subscriber, #7712)
Parent article: Followups: performance counters, ksplice, and fsnotify

Changing the notify mechanism again may be a good idea, but I don't know whether it will map easily to the network protocol so this needs more analysis. Since notify is most useful over a network filesystem (if you are running on a local file system, notify is useful but polling is not as expensive as it is over a network, and there are other ways that applications can detect new files). CIFS and SMB2 have a notify mechanism (and Samba server's need to call this led to the initial Linux kernel implementation, which matched fairly closely with the cifs wire protocol) but I don't know if the new mechanism will make it harder or easier to finish the notify support in the cifs client (which is currently turned off in mainline).


(Log in to post comments)

Followups: performance counters, ksplice, and fsnotify

Posted Dec 19, 2008 22:50 UTC (Fri) by oak (guest, #2786) [Link]

> if you are running on a local file system, notify is useful but polling
is not as expensive as it is over a network,

Maybe you were thinking of something tethered to a power cord? For
battery powered devices, polling is evil.

(Before dynticks got into mainstream, Desktop crowd using laptops might
not have noticed / cared, but with dynticks you suddenly start to see how
much less power your laptop uses and how much longer it can run when
polling wakeups get reduced radically.)

Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds