Re: [PATCH][RFC] relayfs (1/4) (Documentation)

[Tom Zanussi]

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.

-- 
Regards,

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/