Andrew Morton wrote: > Still, first let us get a handle on who wants relayfs now and in the future > and for what. Then we can better decide.
We used relayfs for our series of tests on PREEMPT_RT and I-Pipe. Specifically, we used relayfs buffers to store the timestamps for our interrupt latency measurements. This allowed us to easily have access to very large buffering areas without having to worry about any form of detailed resource allocation, or runtime overhead of logging. IOW, it allowed us to concentrate on our main priority: log a very large amount of timestamps. On the LTT side, relayfs is bound to be at the center of whatever architecture we settle on for the ongoing rewrite. For having used it for past releases of LTT, we know that it can handle very heavy data throughput with little overhead using a relatively simple API. 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/
