Shmulik, the only discussion as far as i know is the one that happened
in this thread. I have not seen any discussion before.
Folks, I really didnt mean to start such a long thread ;->
cheers,
jamal
On Mon, 2003-08-11 at 19:15, Shmulik Hen wrote:
> May I remind you all that the original discussion was only about
> stuff that has to do with configuration time. There was no mention of
> any run time code. ifenslave only does three simple things - add a
> slave, remove a slave and set the current active slave, that's all.
>
> The drive was to try and make ifenslave slimmer regarding those three
> operations only in the way that any setting of the slave will be done
> by the kernel module instead of the configuration application. There
> is no real "brain" there anyway.
>
> We had some experience with creating an configuration application that
> was incredibly smart and was always aware of what was going on in the
> driver and could make all possible decisions before even attempting
> to access the driver so it could fail the operation without
> "bothering" the driver. It's gigantic. It's extremely hard to install
> and configure. It's even harder to maintain. And all it was meant to
> do is configuration. Imagine what would happen if it was also
> supposed to handle run time issues.
>
> I am not aware of anything like moving kernel code into applications.
> Was that something that was discussed in OLS ? Where can I find some
> more info about this trend ?
>
>
> Shmulik.
>
>
|