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

[Jay Lan]

Andrew Morton wrote:
> Kaigai Kohei <kaigai@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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.
>
> Question is: is this sufficient for CSA?

Yes, fork, exec, and exit upcalls are sufficient for CSA.

The framework i proposed earlier should satisfy your requirement a
and b, and provides upcalls needed by BSD, ELSA and CSA. Maybe i
misunderstood your concern of the 'very light weight' framework
i proposed besides being "overkill"?

- jay


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/