[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTinZaSchq6UKUkiaFTrmdHMpY7x4uN886r7iXeYU@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 15:41:06 +0200
From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Tom Zanussi <zanussi@...ibm.com>,
Karim Yaghmour <karim@...rsys.com>,
Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Optimize relay_alloc_page_array() slightly by using
vzalloc rather than vmalloc and memset
* Jens Axboe (axboe@...nel.dk) wrote:
>> On 2010-10-30 17:47, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>> > BLK_DEV_IO_TRACE seems to still select RELAY. Has it completed its
>> > transition to either Ftrace or Perf ? Depending on Jens, moving blktrace
>> > relay dependency to the Generic Ring Buffer Library might be a good
>> > option to consider.
>>
>> The blktrace user bits is still (by far) the most wide spread way that
>> blktrace is used in the field, and those still rely on relayfs. So no,
>> we can't kill it now.
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 3:08 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers
<mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca> wrote:
> What I am proposing is that the Generic Ring Buffer Library could
> replace relayfs without changing any of the interfaces blktrace exposes
> to user-space. Indeed, I would not remove relayfs unless there was a
> replacement.
We don't in general NAK cleanups because of future features or
removals that may or may not happen.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists