Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 25 Feb 2005 09:32:41 -0800 | From | Jay Lan <> | Subject | Re: [Lse-tech] Re: A common layer for Accounting packages |
| |
Andrew Morton wrote: > Kaigai Kohei <kaigai@ak.jp.nec.com> wrote: > >>In my understanding, what Andrew Morton said is "If target functionality can >> implement in user space only, then we should not modify the kernel-tree". > > > fork, exec and exit upcalls sound pretty good to me. As long as > > a) they use the same common machinery and > > b) they are next-to-zero cost if something is listening on the netlink > socket but no accounting daemon is running. > > Question is: is this sufficient for CSA?
Yes, fork, exec, and exit upcalls are sufficient for CSA.
The framework i proposed earlier should satisfy your requirement a and b, and provides upcalls needed by BSD, ELSA and CSA. Maybe i misunderstood your concern of the 'very light weight' framework i proposed besides being "overkill"?
- jay
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |