[Devel] Re: [PATCH 2/4] sysfs: Implement sysfs manged shadow directory support.

[Tejun Heo]

Kirill Korotaev wrote:
> Tejun Heo wrote:
>> I thought something like supermount plus some twists or fuse based sysfs
>> proxy would fit better.  Dunno whether or how uevent and polling stuff
>> can work that way tho.  Note that sysfs no longer keeps dentries and
>> inodes pinned.  It might make the shared dentry stuff harder.
> 
> We simply don't share sysfs dentries/inodes between containers.
> It's not that frequently used time critical fs to be super-optimized... :)

OIC, dentries and inodes are not shared.  Good then.  Agreed that sysfs
doesn't need to be super-optimized as long as big machines aren't
penalized too much (both memory and cpu cycle wise).

> I don't like the idea with fuse, since sysfs exports kernel-related stuff,
> so doing it via user-space would be pain.

Yeah, it would be cumbersome to setup but it's also fast and easy to toy
with for prototypes at least.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers at lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers