Re: [Tracker] [systemd-devel] How to use cgroups for Tracker?
- From: Martyn Russell <martyn lanedo com>
- To: Lennart Poettering <mztabzr 0pointer de>
- Cc: systemd-devel lists freedesktop org, Philip Van Hoof <philip codeminded be>, Tracker mailing list <tracker-list gnome org>
- Subject: Re: [Tracker] [systemd-devel] How to use cgroups for Tracker?
- Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 12:17:06 +0100
On 23/10/14 12:01, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Thu, 23.10.14 11:40, Martyn Russell (martyn lanedo com) wrote:
I don't really understand why it was developed as a half complete solution
if I am honest. It's not as if there are no examples to follow out there
(FSEvents) and it's not as if we didn't say what our user space requirements
were at the time.
fanotify may be use in synchronous mode, which is useful for virus
scanners. The asynchronous mode is just an addition on top, but
unfortunately nobody looks after it.
To my knowlegde apple's fsevents stuff isn't really the holy grail as
it basically makes the kernel hang on userspace components. That's the
wrong way round. userpsace may sync on kernel, and userspace on
userspace, but kernel on userspace is just bad design.
From what I could tell (from the article), it starts allocating memory
if the buffer becomes too large while waiting on the user space app to
sync and of course, there is a finite amount of that. It would be good
to learn from their approach and perhaps update it slightly according to
what we prefer in the kernel (as you say not depending on user space).
But what's also important to note is, not just ANY app can ask for those
events, only trusted apps can - so it's not that bad for Apple. I don't
think this would work for the Linux kernel because not everyone would be
running Tracker. So yea, bad design for us, but not insurmountable to
work around.
--
Regards,
Martyn
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]