Quoting Eric W. Biederman ([email protected]):
> There are two additional things I can think of that are worth looking
> at:
> - moving copy_uts_namespace, and copy_namespace inside of copy_nsproxy
> so we only run those we create a new nsproxy instance.
Was about to do that when I stopped because I was thinking I'd need to
keep track of which namespace had been copied before a failaure, for
the sake of clone.
But of course I don't have to - copy_nsproxy could do the cleanup itself
on failure.
So this should be a nice little cleanup - especially as # namespaces
increases.
> - Attempting to optimize cache line utilization by placing the
> structures in line in struct ns_proxy:
> struct nsproxy {
> atomic_t count;
> struct namespace *namespace;
> struct uts_namespace *uts_ns;
> struct namespace namespace_data;
> struct new_utsname uts_data;
> };
> With the nsproxy count severing as a count for both the embedded
> data and for the nsproxy itself. I think it is a long shot but it
> could be interesting.
>
> Given the frequency of use of the uts namespace and the filesystem
> namespace simply I think not accessing those namespaces on fork is
> likely to reduce the additional cache line miss rate enough so
> that it is lost in the noise.
Not getting this. Are you saying the uts_data would be a copy of
the contents of *uts_ns, or that uts_ns points to nsproxy->uts_data?
If the latter, then just unsharing uts_ns but not mounts namespace
is no longer possible, right?
thanks,
-serge
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]