On Tue, 2005-10-25 at 18:48 -0700, Chris Wright wrote:
> * Matt Helsley ([email protected]) wrote:
> > It seems to me that this is the consensus here and on LSE-Tech.
> > This patch addresses the needs of ELSA and CKRM and is amenable to using
> > the patches recently proposed on lse-tech to pull out the common piece.
>
> Sounds good. What about the SGI needs (for PAGG)? They just posted
> pnotify pretty recently. Or is that what you mean by consensus and
> possible use of 'task notifiers'?
>
> thanks,
> -chris
If this patch used pnotify it would be much more complicated and it
would need to attach small pieces of data to each task. However there
have been some alternative proposals. The 'task_notifier' patch posted
by Jack Steiner was much closer to what this patch needs:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=lse-tech&m=112869558116290&w=2
'task_notifier' is smaller and easier to review but still requires
per-task data that would complicate the Process Events Connector patch.
There has been some discussion in the above thread on how to address the
per-task data/notification needs of PAGG and the all-task notification
needs of ELSA and CKRM.
Cheers,
-Matt Helsley
-
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]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
