From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261774AbTJMOy1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Oct 2003 10:54:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261775AbTJMOy1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Oct 2003 10:54:27 -0400 Received: from e3.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.103]:60308 "EHLO e3.ny.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261774AbTJMOyR (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Oct 2003 10:54:17 -0400 From: Tom Zanussi MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <16266.48213.389446.904941@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 09:53:09 -0500 To: "David S. Miller" Cc: karim@opersys.com, jmorris@redhat.com, zanussi@us.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bob@watson.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] relayfs (1/4) (Documentation) In-Reply-To: <20031011103429.5ebe3085.davem@redhat.com> References: <3F859DF1.8000602@opersys.com> <20031010005703.0daf3e19.davem@redhat.com> <3F86C519.4030209@opersys.com> <20031011103429.5ebe3085.davem@redhat.com> X-Mailer: VM(ViewMail) 7.01 under Emacs 20.7.2 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org David S. Miller writes: > On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 10:41:29 -0400 > Karim Yaghmour 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 IBM Linux Technology Center/RAS