Re: [PATCH][RFC] relayfs (1/4) (Documentation)
From: Tom Zanussi
Date: Mon Oct 13 2003 - 09:56:20 EST
David S. Miller writes:
> On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 10:41:29 -0400
> Karim Yaghmour <karim@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > The question isn't whether netlink can transfer hundreds of thousands of
> > data units in one fell swoop. The question is: is it more efficient than
> > relayfs at this?
> Wrong, it's the queueing model that's important for applications
> like this.
relayfs isn't trying to provide a generic queueing model - it's
basically just an efficient buffering mechanism with hooks for
kernel-user data transfer. It's a lower-level thing than netlink and
might even be of use to netlink as a buffering layer.
In any case, applications like tracing or kernel debugging don't have
a need for more of a queueing model than the in-order delivery and
event buffering capabilities relayfs provides, and since applications
like these either can't use netlink or would benefit from the
efficiency provided by a no-frills buffering scheme, maybe there
is actually a use for something like relayfs.
Tom Zanussi <zanussi@xxxxxxxxxx>
IBM Linux Technology Center/RAS
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/