Rami,
Thanks for the link. It's an interesting read. (Though my intended
solution goes even lower; sys_XXX calls the flip_XXX and -read/write
methods.)
I total agree with the writer; If you need FS access for configuration
files, you shouldn't be using the FS in a kernel modules in the first
Muli,
I well aware of the controversy surrounding FS access from kernel
modules and I accept, that in general, kernel modules should be using
the FS for storage.
However, in essence, I'm using the *wrong* tool for the right job: I
shouldn't be using Linux on a i386/x86-64 in the first place; I
Muli,
I well aware of the controversy surrounding FS access from kernel
modules and I accept, that in general, kernel modules should be using
the FS for storage.
However, in essence, I'm using the *wrong* tool for the right job: I
shouldn't be using Linux on a i386/x86-64 in the first place; I
On Sat, 30 Jul 2005, Gilboa Davara wrote:
After doing some contemplating I decided that I don't really need access
to an FS; or actually,all I need a is huge cyclic buffer with fast
sequential R/W and force-able sync. If anything the VFS layer will only
slow me down.
I wonder if the raw
On Sat, Jul 30, 2005 at 09:50:29AM +0300, Gilboa Davara wrote:
After doing some contemplating I decided that I don't really need access
to an FS; or actually, all I need a is huge cyclic buffer with fast
sequential R/W and force-able sync. If anything the VFS layer will only
slow me down.
I haven't used Apache much, but quite a while ago, I did set up a (trivial)
web page to see how this worked. At the time, I had no real problems. Today,
I tried to access that page and got a 403 error.
Here's what I've tried so far.
1 - I looked for error messages and found the following
in
