linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 00/13] Add kdbus implementation

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]

Message-ID: <20150119233812.GA1874@sig21.net>
Date:	Tue, 20 Jan 2015 00:38:12 +0100
From:	Johannes Stezenbach <js@...21.net>
To:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:	arnd@...db.de, ebiederm@...ssion.com, gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
	teg@...m.no, jkosina@...e.cz, luto@...capital.net,
	linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	daniel@...que.org, dh.herrmann@...il.com, tixxdz@...ndz.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/13] Add kdbus implementation

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 04:31:55AM +0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 09:19:06PM +0100, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
> > These two statements somehow contradict. From my admittedly very
> > limited experience, I never used D-Bus because it did not
> > fit my usage scenarios: I never needed a bus, only point-to-point
> > links like pipes or sockets.
> 
> Great, then you don't need this, no need to worry about it at all, why
> are we having this conversation? :)

Well, for one because that's what I wanted to find out...

> > Well, it made your intentions a bit clearer, but it does
> > not help to sell kdbus to me, sorry ;-/
> 
> It's not my "goal" to sell kdbus to you, if you don't want it, great,

I used this language because I think you're not providing
the facts that would allow me to judge for myself whether
kdbus is a good idea.  Those automotive applications you
were talking about, what was the OS they were ported from
and what was the messaging API they used?

> But odds are, you are using a system with D-Bus today, if not, then you
> are using Linux in a very specific and limited manner, which is
> wonderful, in that case this whole thread isn't really pertinent.
> 
> Lots of people do use D-Bus, and for those users, that is what this
> patchset is for.

As I said before, I'm seeing about a dozen D-Bus messages per minute,
nothing that would justify adding kdbus to the kernel for
performance reasons.  Wrt security I'm also not aware of any
open issues with D-Bus.  Thus I doubt normal users of D-Bus
would see any benefit from kdbus.  I also think none of the
applications I can install from my distribution has any performance
issue with D-Bus.

And this is the point where I ask myself if I missed something.

Thanks,
Johannes
--
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/