Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 20 Feb 2003 08:01:43 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 20 Feb 2003 08:01:42 -0500 Received: from ns.suse.de ([213.95.15.193]:65287 "EHLO Cantor.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id convert rfc822-to-8bit; Thu, 20 Feb 2003 08:01:41 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Andreas Gruenbacher Organization: SuSE Labs, SuSE Linux AG To: Neil Brown , Trond Myklebust Subject: [RFC] ACLs over NFS: Handling of large buffers Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 14:11:42 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Olaf Kirch MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Message-Id: <200302201411.42714.agruen@suse.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1016 Lines: 24 Hello, in the current kernel nfsd, a buffer of (8+1)k is allocated for each kernel nfsd thread. Since the NFS ACL protocol requests arrive at the same transport endpoint, in the short term (i.e., for the NFS ACL protocol) I need a limit of (24+1)k for each nfsd thread. While this wastes memory that will not be used most of the time, the amount of wasted memory is still not totally crazy. However, the NFS ACL protocol still does not support Extended Attributes in general, so somebody will have to implement one of the EA NFS protocols in addition. (I'm leaning towards the one protocol extension from SGI OB1). This will require a buffer of 64k. So I'm wondering how we could solve the problem of buffer space more flexibly. Any ideas? Thanks, Andreas. - 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/