2008/6/2 Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > On Sun, Jun 01, 2008 at 03:51:53PM +0100, Tom Spink wrote: >> >> (resend to include CCs) > > What cc's? Still no xfs cc on it. I added it to this reply.... > >> This (short) patch series is another RFC for the patch that introduces on-demand >> filesystem initialisation. In addition to the original infrastructure >> implementation (with clean-ups), it changes XFS to use this new infrastructure. >> >> I wrote a toy filesystem (testfs) to simulate scheduling/allocation delays and >> to torture the mount/unmount cycles. I didn't manage to deadlock the system >> in my tests. XFS also works as expected aswell, in that the global threads >> are not created until an XFS filesystem is mounted for the first time. When the >> last XFS filesystem is unmounted, the threads go away. >> >> Please let me know what you think! > > Why even bother? This is why we have /modular/ kernels - if you're > not using XFS then don't load it and you won't see those pesky > threads. That'll save on a bunch of memory as well because the xfs > module ain't small (>480k on i386).... Yeah, absolutely. But if the filesystem is built-in, you can't unload it. > Cheers, > > Dave. Thanks for taking a look, anyway! -- Tom Spink -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
