[lkml]   [2005]   [Jul]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Merging relayfs?

On Mon, 18 Jul 2005, Steven Rostedt wrote:

> I'm actually very much against this. Looking at a point of view from the
> logdev device. Having a callback to know to continue at every buffer
> switch would just be slowing down something that is expected to be very
> fast.

What exactly would be slowed down?
It would just move around some code and even avoid the overwrite mode

> I don't see the problem with having an overwrite mode or not. Why
> can't relayfs know this?

The point is to design a simple and flexible relayfs layer, which means
not every possible function has to be done in the relayfs layer, as long
it's flexible enough to build additional functionality on top of it (for
which it can again provide some library functions).

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: 2005-07-18 16:26    [W:0.078 / U:2.932 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site