From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1423486AbcB0LyT (ORCPT ); Sat, 27 Feb 2016 06:54:19 -0500 Received: from mail-ob0-f196.google.com ([209.85.214.196]:36009 "EHLO mail-ob0-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756183AbcB0LyR (ORCPT ); Sat, 27 Feb 2016 06:54:17 -0500 Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2016 06:54:15 -0500 From: Tejun Heo To: Petr Mladek Cc: Kazimierz Krosman , akpm@linux-foundation.org, peter@hurleysoftware.com, vvs@virtuozzo.com, corbet@lwn.net, arnd@arndb.de, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, daniel@zonque.org, kay.sievers@vrfy.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, k.lewandowsk@samsung.com, m.niesluchow@samsung.com, richard.weinberger@gmail.com, b.zolnierkie@samsung.com, luto@amacapital.net, knhoon.baik@samsung.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/8] Additional kmsg devices Message-ID: <20160227115415.GA3965@htj.duckdns.org> References: <1456314801-32738-1-git-send-email-k.krosman@samsung.com> <20160225214714.GJ6092@mtj.duckdns.org> <56D051A2.6050106@samsung.com> <20160226144718.GF3305@pathway.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160226144718.GF3305@pathway.suse.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 03:47:18PM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote: > > Could you explain in more detail what did you mean by IPC problems? > > I guess that the idea was to make IPC more effective in general. > You definitely could not move all functionality that needs IPC > into the kernel. 1. There are multiple ways to do IPC and I don't think what was implemented as the comparison is optimal. 2. If that were optimal, we have an a lot larger general IPC problem than logging. We can't possibly implement custom solution for each specific IPC use case in kernel. Thanks. -- tejun