Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] netem: trace enhancement

From: Patrick McHardy <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2007 08:45:39 +0100

Ariane Keller wrote:
> Thanks for your comments!
> 
> I'd like to better understand your dislike of the current implementation 
>  of the data transfer from user space to kernel space.
> Is it the fact that we use configfs?
> I think, we had already a discussion about this (and we changed from 
> procfs to configfs).
> Or don't you like that we need a user space daemon which is responsible 
> for feeding the data to the kernel module?
> I think we do not have another option, since the trace file may be of 
> arbitrary length.
> Or anything else?

I dislike using anything besides rtnetlink for qdisc configuration.
The only way to transfer arbitary amounts of data over netlink would
be to spread the data over multiple messages. But then again, you're
using kmalloc and only seem to allocate 4k, so how large are these
traces in practice?