Another vote in favor of relayfs here ... I am reminded by my good colleagues at SGI that relayfs is a key to the Linux Trace Toolkit (LTT), which is in turn an important technology for some product(s) on which SGI is working. It is uses such as this which speak to the value of including relayfs in the kernel. -- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.925.600.0401 - 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/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] Re: relayfs documentation sucks?
- From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
- relayfs as infrastructure, ltt, systemtap, diskstat
- From: bert hubert <bert.hubert@netherlabs.nl>
- Re: [PATCH] Re: relayfs documentation sucks?
- References:
- Merging relayfs?
- From: Tom Zanussi <zanussi@us.ibm.com>
- relayfs documentation sucks?
- From: bert hubert <bert.hubert@netherlabs.nl>
- Re: relayfs documentation sucks?
- From: Tom Zanussi <zanussi@us.ibm.com>
- [PATCH] Re: relayfs documentation sucks?
- From: bert hubert <bert.hubert@netherlabs.nl>
- Re: [PATCH] Re: relayfs documentation sucks?
- From: Tom Zanussi <zanussi@us.ibm.com>
- Re: [PATCH] Re: relayfs documentation sucks?
- From: bert hubert <bert.hubert@netherlabs.nl>
- Re: [PATCH] Re: relayfs documentation sucks?
- From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
- Re: [PATCH] Re: relayfs documentation sucks?
- From: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>
- Re: [PATCH] Re: relayfs documentation sucks?
- From: bert hubert <bert.hubert@netherlabs.nl>
- Merging relayfs?
- Prev by Date: slow tcp acks on loopback device
- Next by Date: Re: slow tcp acks on loopback device
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] Re: relayfs documentation sucks?
- Next by thread: relayfs as infrastructure, ltt, systemtap, diskstat
- Index(es):
