[lkml]   [2006]   [Feb]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH, RFC] sysfs: relay channel buffers as sysfs attributes
    On Sun, Feb 19 2006, Tom Zanussi wrote:
    > Paul Mundt writes:
    > > On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 09:56:23AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
    > >
    > [...]
    > > > And I agree with Christoph, with this change, you don't need a separate
    > > > relayfs mount anymore.
    > > >
    > > Yes, that's where I was going with this, but I figured I'd give the
    > > relayfs people a chance to object to it going away first.
    > >
    > > If with this in sysfs and simple handling through debugfs people are
    > > content with the relay interface for whatever need, then getting rid of
    > > relayfs entirely is certainly the best option. We certainly don't need
    > > more pointless virtual file systems.
    > >
    > > I'll work up a patch set for doing this as per Cristoph's kernel/relay.c
    > > suggestion. Thanks for the feedback.
    > Considering that I recently offered to post a patch that would do
    > essentially the same thing, I can't have any objections to this. ;-)
    > But just to make sure I'm not missing anything in the patches, please
    > let me know if any of the following is incorrect. What they do is
    > remove the fs part of relayfs and move the remaining code into a
    > single file, while leaving everthing else basically intact i.e. the
    > relayfs kernel API remains the same and existing clients would only
    > need to make relatively minor changes:
    > - find a new home for their relay files i.e. sysfs, debufs or procfs.
    > - replace any relayfs-specific code with their counterparts in the new
    > filesystem i.e. directory creation/removal, non-relay ('control')
    > file creation/removal.
    > - change userspace apps to look for the relay files in the new
    > filesystem instead of relayfs e.g. change /relay/* to /sys/*
    > in the relay file pathnames.
    > Although I personally don't have any problems with doing this, I've
    > added some of the authors of current relayfs applications to the cc:
    > list in case they might have any objections to it. The major relayfs
    > applications I'm aware of are:
    > - blktrace, currently in the -mm tree. This could probably move its
    > relayfs files to sysfs using your new interface.

    blktrace just needs minor file location changes to work with this
    scheme, so no problem for me.

    I think the patch is a good idea, it's a lot nicer than a separate fs.

    Jens Axboe

    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: 2006-02-20 10:22    [W:0.035 / U:0.284 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site