Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] kernfs: proposed locking and concurrency improvement

[Rick Lindsley]

On 6/22/20 10:53 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:

> I don't know. The above highlights the absurdity of the approach itself to
> me. You seem to be aware of it too in writing: 250,000 "devices".

Just because it is absurd doesn't mean it wasn't built that way :)

I agree, and I'm trying to influence the next hardware design.  However, what's already out there is memory units that must be accessed in 256MB blocks.  If you want to remove/add a GB, that's really 4 blocks of memory you're manipulating, to the hardware.  Those blocks have to be registered and recognized by the kernel for that to work.

Rick