On Thu, 2006-10-12 at 16:51 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
<snip>
> > BTW, it it not just CKRM/RG, Paul Menage as recently extracted the
> > processes aggregation from cpuset to have an independent infrastructure
> > (http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=ckrm-tech&m=116006307018720&w=2), which
> > has its own file system. I was advocating him to use configfs. But, he
> > also has this issue/limitation.
>
> That's one reason it is so easy to just write your own filesystem then.
> What is it these days, less than 200 lines of code? I bet you can even
For my_school_project_fs perhaps 200 lines is sufficient.
Paul Menage's patch which Chandra was referring to:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/9/28/104
is 1700 insertions. RCFS was around 1500 lines -- similar to Paul's
patch -- before we moved to configfs and reduced that to about 300-400
lines. This suggests we'd need around 1500 lines of filesystem code --
7.5 times your estimate.
> condence more things to make it 100 lines if you really try. That seems
> much more sane than trying to bend configfs into something different.
I don't agree. I think it's insane not to use configfs just because we
need a list of pids for each group of tasks.
> Why are people so opposed to creating their own filesystems?
There are lots of reasons not to create your own filesystem. When
you're not already a kernel maintainer it's no small task to create and
get a non-trivial filesystem accepted into the kernel. Getting people to
review whole new filesystems has its own problems:
http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0610.1/1928.html
Cheers,
-Matt Helsley
-
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]
