xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Jfs-discussion] Unneeded kernel threads (xfs, jfs, gfs2)

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Jfs-discussion] Unneeded kernel threads (xfs, jfs, gfs2)
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 10:31:01 -0500
Cc: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>, Georgi Chorbadzhiyski <gf@xxxxxxxxxxx>, cluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxx, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, jfs-discussion@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Donald Douwsma <donaldd@xxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20080513092851.GA19879@infradead.org>
References: <4828CAC6.3090402@unixsol.org> <48292742.8090409@sgi.com> <482951C3.60600@unixsol.org> <20080513090311.GZ155679365@sgi.com> <20080513092156.GA26736@infradead.org> <20080513092851.GA19879@infradead.org>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Macintosh/20080421)
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 05:21:56AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> Well, we could refcount the number of active xfs instances and
>> start/stop the global threads based on that.  Not really worth my
>> time IHMO, but if someone comes up with a clean enough patch it should
>> go in.
> 
> Actually doing it in the VFS might be even better.  Add ->init and
> ->exit methods to struct file_system_type and then the filesystems can
> move most of module_init/exit into the new methods.

Hmm I like that idea! :)

-Eric


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>