[lkml]   [2005]   [Feb]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [Lse-tech] Re: A common layer for Accounting packages
    Andrew Morton wrote:
    > Kaigai Kohei <> 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
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:10    [W:0.023 / U:19.552 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site