Re: [patch 1/2] fork_connector: add a fork connector

Evgeniy Polyakov
2005-03-30T10:53:09Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 990 bytes --]

On Wed, 2005-03-30 at 20:25 +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> Paul Jackson <pj@engr.sgi.com> wrote:
> >
> > So I suppose if fork_connector were not used to collect <parent pid,
> > child pid> information for accounting, then someone would have to make
> > the case that there were enough other uses, of sufficient value, to add
> > fork_connector. We have to be a bit careful, in the kernel, to avoid
> > adding mechanisms until we have the immediate use in hand. If we don't
> > do this, then the kernel ends up looking like the Gargoyles on a
> > Renaissance church - burdened with overly ornate features serving no
> > earthly purpose.
>
> I agree completely. In fact the whole drivers/connector directory
> looks pretty suspect. Are there any in-kernel users of it at all?

SuperIO subsystem.
In agenda sit w1, acrypto [but it already looks like it will not be
included :) ].

--
Evgeniy Polyakov

Crash is better than data corruption -- Arthur Grabowski

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]