Re: [Lse-tech] Re: A common layer for Accounting packages

Marcelo Tosatti
2005-02-27T14:11:06Z

On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 09:28:39PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Kaigai Kohei <kaigai@ak.jp.nec.com> wrote:
> >
> > In my understanding, what Andrew Morton said is "If target functionality can
> > implement in user space only, then we should not modify the kernel-tree".
>
> fork, exec and exit upcalls sound pretty good to me. As long as
>
> a) they use the same common machinery and
>
> b) they are next-to-zero cost if something is listening on the netlink
> socket but no accounting daemon is running.

b) would involved being able to avoid sending netlink messages in case there are
no listeners. AFAIK that isnt possible currently, netlink sends
packets unconditionally.

Am I wrong?