Re: [RFC PATCH 00/11] an introduction of library operating system for Linux (LibOS)

[Hajime Tazaki]

At Tue, 24 Mar 2015 16:27:51 +0100,
Richard Weinberger wrote:
> 
> I'd say you should try hard to re-use/integrate your work in arch/um.
> With um we already have an architecture which targets userspace,
> having two needs a very good justification.

in addition to the case of my previous email, libos is not
limited to run on user-mode: it is just a library which can
be used with various programs. thus it has a potential (not
implemented yet) to run on a hypervisor like OSv or MirageOS
does for application containment, or run on a bare-metal
machine as rumpkernel does. We already have a clear
interface for the underlying layer to be able to add such
backend.

again, it's not only for user-mode.

mixing all the stuff in a single architecture may not only
mislead to users, but also introduce conceptual-disagreements
during code sharing of essential parts. 

I don't see any benefits to have a name 'um' with this idea.

# I'm not saying sharing a part of code is bad idea at all, btw.

-- Hajime
--
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/