linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] Unify KVM kernel-space and user-space code into a single project

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

Date:	Sun, 21 Mar 2010 23:44:36 +0200
From:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC:	Antoine Martin <antoine@...afix.co.uk>,
	Anthony Liguori <anthony@...emonkey.ws>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
	"Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Sheng Yang <sheng@...ux.intel.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
	oerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
	Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@...hat.com>,
	Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>,
	Zachary Amsden <zamsden@...hat.com>, ziteng.huang@...el.com,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
	Fr?d?ric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Unify KVM kernel-space and user-space code into a single
 project

On 03/21/2010 11:00 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Avi Kivity<avi@...hat.com>  wrote:
>
>    
>> On 03/21/2010 09:59 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>      
>>> Frankly, i was surprised (and taken slightly off base) by both Avi and Anthony
>>> suggesting such a clearly inferior "add a demon to the guest space" solution.
>>> It's a usability and deployment non-starter.
>>>        
>> It's only clearly inferior if you ignore every consideration against it.
>> It's definitely not a deployment non-starter, see the tons of daemons that
>> come with any Linux system. [...]
>>      
> Avi, please dont put arguments into my mouth that i never made.
>    

Sorry, that was not the intent.  I meant that putting things into the 
kernel have disadvantages that must be considered.

> My (clearly expressed) argument was that:
>
>      _a new guest-side demon is a transparent instrumentation non-starter_
>
> What is so hard to understand about that simple concept? Instrumentation is
> good if it's as transparent as possible.
>
> Of course lots of other features can be done via a new user-space package ...
>    

I believe you can deploy this daemon via a (default) package, without 
any hassle to users.

-- 
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.

--
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/