Re: Merging relayfs?

[Karim Yaghmour <karim@opersys.com>]

Greg KH wrote:
> Based on the proposed users of this fs, I don't see any.  What ones are
> you saying are not "debug" type operations?  And yes, I consider LTT a
> "debug" type operation :)
> 
> The best part of this, is it gives distros and users a consistant place
> to mount the fs, and to know where this kind of thing shows up in the fs
> namespace.

Except that relayfs contains files that all behave in a very specific
way: as relayfs buffers, while debugfs may contain a variety of different
types of files.

I kind'a see what you're trying to say, and I fully understand that some
debugfs users may indeed use the relayfs fileops to add an entry in
debugfs which serves as a buffer, and that's the very reason we exported
them to boot. But there's something to be said about having a single
filesystem (and therefore tree somewhere in /) which contains entries
dedicated to a single purpose: dump huge amounts of data out of the
kernel and into userspace whether or not the system is being debuged.

>From a user point of view, it sounds awfully weird if they're using
"debugfs" on a production system ...

> Last I looked, this was not possible.  Has this changed in the latest
> version?

Here's from 2.6.13-rc2-mm1 fs/relayfs/inode.c
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(relayfs_open);
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(relayfs_poll);
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(relayfs_mmap);
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(relayfs_release);
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(relayfs_file_operations);
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(relayfs_create_dir);
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(relayfs_remove_dir);

It's been there ever since you've asked for it earlier this year :)

Karim
-- 
Author, Speaker, Developer, Consultant
Pushing Embedded and Real-Time Linux Systems Beyond the Limits
http://www.opersys.com || karim@opersys.com || 1-866-677-4546