On Wed, Jun 06, 2018 at 08:14:27AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 8:04 AM Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > The notification implementation isn't super light weight, so the patch > > ratelimits the notifications by capping minimum notification interval > > interval to 10ms. > > Yeah, I looked at the patch (and the code) to make sense of the explanation. > > My reaction to that was that it might be a better idea to simply not > notify if a notification was already pending, rather than have the > timeout. Or perhaps in addition to. The path _to_ the fsnotify code > looked quite messy, though. Yeah, getting to the inode is currently quite involved. Some of the complications come from the fact that a kernfs node can be associated with multiple inodes for sysfs namespace support. The right thing to do could be linking the inodes to the kernfs node and protect it with a spinlock so that we don't have to punt and walk them directly from notification path. For now, I think the 10ms thing is an acceptable workaround but this likely needs more work in the future. Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cgroups" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
