On Monday September 6, hch@xxxxxx wrote: > On Mon, Sep 06, 2004 at 11:05:54AM +1000, Neil Brown wrote: > > > Christoph points out that this is fairly wild procfs abuse. We want to be > > > moving away from that sort of thing, not adding to it. > > > > I guess it depends on what you mean by "wild procfs abuse"... > > Given that /proc/mdstat already exists it doesn't seem too > > unreasonable to add a little functionality to it. How much does it hurt? > > poll on procfs is defintily abuse, even in categories of the use procfs > every times. > Oh well.. If you gain more from the patch not going in than I gain from it going in, so be it. I'll leave it up to Andrew/Linus. > > > Is it possible to use rml's new event stuff from rc1-mm3's > > > kernel-sysfs-events-layer.patch? Or a bare netlink interface? Or > > > raidfs? > > > > sysfs: > > Probably. I would like to improve sysfs support for md but I > > haven't taken the plunge yet to figure out how it all works. > > kevents may well be ok, but as you may need to handle > > multipath-failed events in times if high memory pressure, and need > > to handle it before pressure can be relieved, I prefer to minimise > > the number of kmallocs needed to get the event to userspace. > > > > bare netlink: > > Probably perter sysfs... Funny, but I remember reading a comment in > > the code (2.4 I think, ages ago) about netlink being deprecated or > > something like that, so I never bothered looking at it. I wonder > > what it meant. > > netlink isn't deprecated, netlink_dev (aka netlink as chardevice nodes) > is. Aha.. that makes sense. Thanks for clarifying that for me. NeilBrown - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
