On Wed, 27 Feb 2008, David P. Quigley wrote:I remember raising this before, but I think we need to try and find a better way to implement this than always allocating labels of a fixed and possibly too-small size. What about perhaps starting with a statically allocated array of say 64 bytes (I can't see any labels on my system larger than that), and then falling back to a a dynamic allocation of up to 32k if it turns out to be too small ? i.e. large labels are a slow path and there is no practical limit on label size. - James -- James Morris <jmorris@namei.org> --
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 004/196] Chinese: add translation of SubmittingPatches |
| James Bottomley | Re: Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel |
| Jeff Garzik | Re: [Patch v2] Make PCI extended config space (MMCONFIG) a driver opt-in |
| Chodorenko Michail | PROBLEM: Celeron Core |
git: | |
| Linus Torvalds | People unaware of the importance of "git gc"? |
| Johannes Schindelin | Re: Empty directories... |
| Jakub Narebski | Re: VCS comparison table |
| Sam Song | Re: Fwd: [OT] Re: Git via a proxy server? |
| J.W. Zondag | Dell PE1950 III - Perc 6i |
| Richard Stallman | Real men don't attack straw men |
| GVG GVG | ssh_exchange_identification: Connection closed by remote host |
| Anselm R. Garbe | OpenBSD 4.0 / Xorg -> vesa 1920x1200 widescreen resolution |
| Jim Winstead Jr. | Re: Root Disk/Book Disk Compatibility |
| Anselm Lingnau | File creation date in UNIX (was: Re: VMS) |
| Rafal Kustra (summer student) | mount |
| Nicholas Yue | Re: more on 486/33 weirdness |
