Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>Maybe you have a different notion of proper mechanism then everyone
>else.
>
Out of personal interest - would a mechanism that promised the following
be considered a "proper mechanism"?
1. Work on all platforms.
2. Allow load and unload in arbitrary order and timings (which also
means "be race free").
3. Have low/zero overhead if not used
Would you also require:
4. Have reasonable overhead when used
a "must have" demand? Would, on the other hand, a:
4b. Have zero overhead when used for functions not hooked
be an alternative demand?
I'm currently trying to work with some other subscribers of this list on
a design. Getting 1, 2 and 3 is a complicated enough task, of course. I
would like to hear estimates about inclusion chances should we manage to
come up with an implmentation that lives up to all the above.
Thanks,
Shachar
-- Shachar Shemesh Open Source integration consultant Home page & resume - http://www.shemesh.biz/- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 15 2003 - 22:00:28 EST