linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/6] staging: android: binder: Remove some funny && usage

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 27 Jun 2009 11:20:14 +0900
From:	GeunSik Lim <leemgs1@...il.com>
To:	Daniel Walker <dwalker@...o99.com>
Cc:	Dianne Hackborn <hackbod@...roid.com>,
	Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
	Brian Swetland <swetland@...gle.com>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <greg@...ah.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] staging: android: binder: Remove some funny && usage

> 2009/6/19 Daniel Walker <dwalker@...o99.com>
>> Most of these questions related to the fact that I don't think an
>> interface like this just slips into the kernel as a driver. Since it's
>> IPC, it's totally generic, and it's not part of a standard (i.e. POSIX),
>> we need to have some better and more specific information about it (or
>> atleast I do).
>
> Hi, sorry I have been slow to respond.  I can give a summary of how
> binder is used in the Android platform and the associated feature set.
>  I won't try to address other options, especially D-Bus, because
> honestly I haven't been following it for the last 3 or so years so
> don't really know its current state of art.
> Dianne Hackborn
Um. You means that  Android team selected Openbinder of beOS from Palm
for IPC mechanism in Android software stack 3 years ago.

At that time,
Framework team used Binder(= modified Openbinder core only) just
because D-bus is a premature for android opensource project like belows.
 -   dbus-0.1.tar.gz	(12-Jan-2005  17:20 ,	 309K)

After all,
Current android software stack consists of two IPC equipments like
Binder and D-bus without especial goal ( ? ) .


> I think the biggest issue I have with the binder implementation is that
> it's doing far too much in the kernel, it's not just IPC. It's also
> thread management, memory management, and lots of other stuff that I
> haven't figured out yet .. A lot of it can already be done in userspace.
> Daniel
I agree with your opinions.
I want  android framework team to improve IPC from two(Binder and D-ubs)
to one in the future.

D-bus is stable and mature for IPC currently as we all know.
This is used in the linux based distributions like Fedora, Ubuntu,
Suse successfully. D-bus also is connecting Udev(Userspace Device)
and sysfs(system filesystem)
well in embedded linux products as Nokie released commericial N8XX products.
I think that In theory as well as in practice, the idea of two IPCs was unsound.

Thks,



-- 
Regards,
GeunSik Lim ( Samsung Electronics )
Blog : http://blog.naver.com/invain/
e-Mail: geunsik.lim@...sung.com
           leemgs@...il.com , leemgs1@...il.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/