[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:0.021 / U:0.444 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site