Re: [GIT PULL] kdbus for 4.1-rc1

[Havoc Pennington]

Hi,

On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 3:27 PM, James Bottomley
<James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> This is why I think kdbus is a bad idea: it solidifies as a linux kernel
> API something which runs counter to granular OS virtualization (and
> something which caused Windows to fall behind Linux in the container
> space).  Splitting out the acceleration problem and leaving the rest to
> user space currently looks fine because the ideas Al and Andy are
> kicking around don't cause problems with OS virtualization.
>

I'm interested in understanding this problem (if only for my own
curiosity) but I'm not confident I understand what you're saying
correctly.

Can I try to explain back / ask questions and see what I have right?

I think you are saying that if an application relies on a system
service (= any other process that runs on the system bus) then to
virtualize that app by itself in a dedicated container, the system bus
and the system service need to also be in the container. So the
container ends up with a bunch of stuff in it beyond only the
application.  Right / wrong / confused?

I also think you're saying that userspace dbus has the same issue
(this isn't a userspace vs. kernel thing per se), the objection to
kdbus is that it makes this issue more solidified / harder to fix?

Do you have ideas on how to go about fixing it, whether in userspace
or kernel dbus?

Havoc
--
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/