Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> *NOT using realyfs* if it is not neccessary for possibly big amout
> of feactures future KProbes IMO in this case is *fundamental*.
>
> To time where this base not requiring relayfs feactures will not be
> integrated in kernel code better IMO will be stop merging relayfs.
This part of the thread is really veering off-topic. This counters thing is
your own personal crusade and has nothing to do with the fundamental need
for a generic buffering mechanism such as relayfs.
I would suggest you start a separate thread to discuss the implementation of
a generic counters mechanism, if that's indeed what you're interested in.
Karim
--
Author, Speaker, Developer, Consultant
Pushing Embedded and Real-Time Linux Systems Beyond the Limits
http://www.opersys.com || [email protected] || 1-866-677-4546
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |