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/