From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262129AbTJFTBq (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Oct 2003 15:01:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262127AbTJFTBq (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Oct 2003 15:01:46 -0400 Received: from mail0-96.ewetel.de ([212.6.122.96]:53757 "EHLO mail0.ewetel.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262129AbTJFTBo (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Oct 2003 15:01:44 -0400 To: Greg KH Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC 0/6] Backing Store for sysfs In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 21:01:40 +0200 Message-Id: From: Pascal Schmidt X-CheckCompat: OK Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 20:20:16 +0200, you wrote in linux.kernel: > Does that make more sense? We can't just look at what happens with this > patch without actually accessing all of the sysfs tree, as that will be > the "normal" case. Well, the normal case for me and other people not using any hot-pluggable devices will be to run a hotplug agent that does absolutely nothing... so in my case, the proposed patch would help - more memory available for the normal work I do. With a static /dev and no hotpluggable stuff around, there is no need for and hotplug agent being there at all. And I do think such system are not too uncommon, so considering them would probably be nice. -- Ciao, Pascal