Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 07 Jan 2004 18:47:02 -0500 | From | Mike Waychison <> | Subject | Re: [autofs] [RFC] Towards a Modern Autofs |
| |
Jeff Garzik wrote: > Mike Waychison wrote: > >> To put it into perspective, the I'm calling for the following major >> changes: > > [...] > >> 2) move the loop that used to spin around and ask kernelspace if there >> was anything to expire into the VFS as well, where it won't be killed. > > [...] > >> (1) and (2) shouldn't be hard at all to do considering David Howells >> has done the majority of this already. (3) is needed in order to >> manage direct mounts properly for when they are 'covered'. >> Admittedly, (4) comes off as an ugly hack. >> >> Also, (2) was the only 'active' task the automount daemon was doing. >> Everything else it did can be rewritten in the form of a usermode >> helper that runs only when it is needed. This simplifies the >> userspace code a lot. > > > Just going by your own explanation here, #2 should not be in the kernel. > > If we moving daemons into the kernel just because they won't be killed, > we'll have Oracle in-kernel before you know it. Completely spurious > reason. >
You wouldn't put a bdflush daemon in userspace either would you? The loop in question is just that; (overly simplified):
while (1) { f = ask_kernel_if_anything_looks_inactive(); if (f) { try_to_umount(f); continue; } else { sleep(x seconds); } }
My point is, if this is the only active action done by userspace, why open it up to being broken?
-- Mike Waychison Sun Microsystems, Inc. 1 (650) 352-5299 voice 1 (416) 202-8336 voice mailto: Michael.Waychison@Sun.COM http://www.sun.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ NOTICE: The opinions expressed in this email are held by me, and may not represent the views of Sun Microsystems, Inc. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |