[lkml]   [2005]   [Jan]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: 2.6.11-rc1-mm1

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005, Karim Yaghmour wrote:

> > Why should a subsystem care about the details of the buffer management?
> Because it wants to enforce a data format on buffer boundaries.

It's interesting to read more about ltt's requirements, but I still think
it's possible to leave this work to the relayfs layer.
Why not just move the ltt buffer management into relayfs and provide a
small library, which extracts the event stream again? Otherwise you have
to duplicate this work for every serious relayfs user anyway.
Completely abstracting the buffer management would the make whole
interface simpler and it would be a lot easier to change without breaking
everything. E.g. it would be possible to use per cpu buffers and remove
the need for different locking mechanisms, for a good tracing mechanism
it's not just important that it's lockless, but also that the cpus don't
share cache lines in the fast path. In this regard relayfs/ltt has really
still too much overhead and the complex relayfs API isn't really making it
easy to fix this.

bye, Roman
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:09    [W:0.552 / U:0.068 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site