3 ms·
You either have the xfs filesystem module loaded or compiled into your kernel. I just tested this out: chris@libreoffice-ia64:~$ ps -eLf | grep '\[' | grep
by chris_wot 11y ago
You either have the xfs filesystem module loaded or compiled into your kernel.
I just tested this out:
chris@libreoffice-ia64:~$ ps -eLf | grep '\[' | grep xfs
chris@libreoffice-ia64:~$ sudo modprobe xfs
[sudo] password for chris:
chris@libreoffice-ia64:~$ ps -eLf | grep '\[' | grep xfs
root 6731 2 6731 0 1 16:53 ? 00:00:00 [xfsalloc]
root 6736 2 6736 0 1 16:53 ? 00:00:00 [xfs_mru_cache]
chris@libreoffice-ia64:~$
chris@libreoffice-ia64:~$ sudo rmmod xfs
chris@libreoffice-ia64:~$ ps -eLf | grep '\[' | grep xfs
chris@libreoffice-ia64:~$
- geofft 11y agoI mean, I know exactly why it's there. :-) GRUB's os-prober is trying to mount all filesystems as all possible types, which autoloads xfs.ko. My point isn't so much what my three kernel threads are doing as why nobody asks these questions, in general, about the kernel. Just about every criticism of systemd applies double to the kernel, but nobody is forking Debian to replace the kernel. (And very few people are contributing to the existing efforts already in Debian to officially support alternative kernels.)
- chris_wot 11y agoAh, I'm following :-) I think perhaps the kernel is more esoteric than systemd, and as a team they have proven themselves over time. I think they get a fair amount of scrutiny from competitors (the BSDs, and Microsoft) and they have a very robust development process so that might explain why it's not as controversial.
- digi_owl 11y agoThe kernel also lives in kernel space, so unless one go micro-kernel, and dumps everything but the bare minimum into user space, a kernel will always be a big blob of code (most of it drivers, btw).