Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932176AbWBSRVZ (ORCPT ); Sun, 19 Feb 2006 12:21:25 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932173AbWBSRVZ (ORCPT ); Sun, 19 Feb 2006 12:21:25 -0500 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:53160 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932164AbWBSRVY (ORCPT ); Sun, 19 Feb 2006 12:21:24 -0500 Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 17:21:20 +0000 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Paul Mundt , zanussi@us.ibm.com, Patrick Mochel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] sysfs: relay channel buffers as sysfs attributes Message-ID: <20060219172120.GA9967@infradead.org> Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig , Paul Mundt , zanussi@us.ibm.com, Patrick Mochel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20060219171748.GA13068@linux-sh.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060219171748.GA13068@linux-sh.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1324 Lines: 26 On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 07:17:48PM +0200, Paul Mundt wrote: > Now with relayfs integrated and the relay_file_operations exported for > use by other file systems, I wonder what people think about adding in a > sysfs attribute for setting up channel buffers. > > The conventional relayfs doesn't make a lot of sense for the use cases > where there are multiple devices to stream data from, particularly if > they're already mapped out through the driver model. Rather than > duplicating device enumeration, simply adding this as an attribute seems > to work reasonably well. > > Tom did some work on the rchan_callbacks for more easily implementing > relay files in other file systems, and it would be nice to use this in a > non-debug context, without duplicating device enumeration in multiple > locations. Hmm, this actually makes a lot of sense. At this point we should probably move the guts of relayfs into kernel/relay.c or something and add a different config option for it. Given this and debugs we could probably kill the separate relayfs filesystem implementation. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/