> On Sep 17, 2019, at 9:08 PM, Takashi YAMAMOTO wrote:
>
> but it would be a super expensive operation for the majority of filesystems,
> right?
But it will most likely be extremely rare, so *shrug*?
-- thorpej
2019年9月16日(月) 3:43 Jason Thorpe :
>
>
> > On Sep 15, 2019, at 11:03 AM, Christos Zoulas
> wrote:
> >
> > I think it is quite reliable because all the file descriptors would be
> recently
> > opened and therefore be in the cache. One would need to DoS the cache
> > cause eviction. If that turns
2019年9月15日(日) 9:06 Christos Zoulas :
> In article <2f29ca9a-0ae1-48d3-b3f4-1556912d4...@me.com>,
> Jason Thorpe wrote:
> >
> >
> >> On Sep 14, 2019, at 2:52 PM, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> >>
> >> On 14.09.2019 23:34, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> >>> Comments?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Question. How does it
In article ,
Jason Thorpe wrote:
>
>
>> On Sep 17, 2019, at 1:39 PM, Christos Zoulas wrote:
>>
>> I am not sure though if we should change the current behavior just to make
>> F_GETPATH better? Opinions?
>
>It seems completely logical that we SHOULD fix this.
I concur. Specially because some
> On Sep 17, 2019, at 1:39 PM, Christos Zoulas wrote:
>
> I am not sure though if we should change the current behavior just to make
> F_GETPATH better? Opinions?
It seems completely logical that we SHOULD fix this.
-- thorpej
In article <4e7e49e0-9c71-1f21-22fc-8ed54590a...@gmx.com>,
Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>On 15.09.2019 20:03, Christos Zoulas wrote:
>> I think it is quite reliable because all the file descriptors would be
>recently
>> opened and therefore be in the cache. One would need
Le 12/09/2019 à 08:21, Maxime Villard a écrit :
Le 06/09/2019 à 15:09, Maxime Villard a écrit :
An idea for a feature similar to KMEM_GUARD - which I recently removed because
it was too weak and useless -, but this time at the pool layer, covering certain
specific pools, without memory
