lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Apr]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/11] nfsacl
From
On Tue, Apr 27, 2004 at 05:51:47PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-04-27 at 17:18, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 12:28:47PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> > > nfsacl-lazy-alloc
> > > Allow to allocate pages in the receive buffers lazily. ACLs may have
> > > up to 1024 entries in nfsacl but usually are small, so allocating
> > > space for them on demand makes sense.
> >
> > Is there any reason we couldn't set the maximum smaller than that? It
> > looks like the acl entries are pretty compact (12 bytes if I'm reading
> > the xdr code right?) so if we limited the length of an xdr-encoded acl
> > to a page that would still allow a few hundred entries. Are there
> > really people that need 1000-entry acls?
>
> Well, that's what the protocol allows so I don't see why we shouldn't
> implement it fully. Besides, nfsacl-lazy-alloc benefits the common case
> even more, because with small acls that fit into xdr_buf->head entirely,
> no page needs to be allocated.

Hm, so looks like xdr_buf->head would fit about 150 entries. Couldn't
that be enough?

--Bruce Fields
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:02    [W:0.024 / U:0.088 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site