Re: Merging relayfs?

[Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>]

On Tue, 2005-07-12 at 11:36 -0500, Tom Zanussi wrote:

>  > 
>  > I totally agree that the vmalloc way is faster, but I would also argue
>  > that the accounting to handle the separate pages would not even be
>  > noticeable with the time it takes to do the actual copying into the
>  > buffer.  So if the accounting adds 3ns on top of 500ns to complete, I
>  > don't think people will mind.
> 
> OK, it sounds like something to experiment with - I can play around
> with it, and later submit a patch to remove vmap if it works out.
> Does that sound like a good idea?

Sounds good to me, since different approaches to a problem are always
good, since it allows for comparing the plusses and minuses.  Not sure
if you want to take a crack using my ring buffers, but although they are
quite confusing, they have been fully tested, since I haven't changed
the ring buffer for a few years (although logdev itself has gone through
several changes).  I use the logdev device on a daily basis to debug
almost every kernel I ever touch.  When working with a new kernel, the
first thing I do is usually add my logdev patch.

Note to all:  The patch I posted is not the same patch that I usually
use (although the ring buffers _are_ the same), since I add stuff that
is usually more specific to what I do. So if something is broken with
it, I would greatly appreciate it if someone lets me know.

Thanks,

-- Steve