Date: Sun, 8 Sep 96 18:46:45 +0300 From: "Daniel C. Sobral" <dcs@gns.com.br> To: hackers@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: namei() Message-ID: <9609081546.AA0086@DANIEL.sobral> In-Reply-To: <199609061651.JAA12132@freefall.freebsd.org> from "owner-hackers-digest@freefall.freebsd.org" at Sep 6 96 9:51 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> From: A JOSEPH KOSHY <koshy@india.hp.com> > Date: Fri, 06 Sep 1996 10:08:31 +0500 > Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs. Linux 96 (my impressions) > > >>>> "tl" == "Terry Lambert" <terry@lambert.org> writes > > tl> This is mostly because the BSD namei() interface is a piece of shit no > tl> one seems prepared to allow a change to because there are one or two > tl> CSRG hackers locked in a closet somewhere, and every once in a while > tl> they shove something out under the door, and God Forbid we lose out > tl> on the ability to integrate those occasional changes. > > On another point, I did some basic kernel profiling while doing some > assorted operations (make kernel, find | cpio -O /dev/null) etc. > > Surprisingly `namei' turned out to be the single biggest contributor to > time spent in the kernel. Does anyone have some ideas on improving namei()? -- Daniel C. Sobral (8-DCS) dcs@gns.com.br e8917523@linf.unb.br
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9609081546.AA0086>