linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] kdbus for 4.1-rc1

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: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1504142357590.26287@pobox.suse.cz>
Date:	Wed, 15 Apr 2015 00:05:01 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
cc:	John Stoffel <john@...ffel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Tom Gundersen <teg@...m.no>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Daniel Mack <daniel@...que.org>,
	David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@...il.com>,
	Djalal Harouni <tixxdz@...ndz.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] kdbus for 4.1-rc1

On Tue, 14 Apr 2015, Steven Rostedt wrote:

> I believe that Linux Plumbers is still accepting MicroConferences. I 
> wonder if this would be a good one to have. Try to get everyone face to 
> face and talk about how exactly kdbus should be implemented in the 
> kernel.

I personally would even put more emphasis on a session that would first 
focus on "why", before we look at "how".

I have already asked about this during the earlier RFC submissions, but 
the only "take-home message" I took from that discussion was "because it's 
faster than what we currently have". I don't find that a sufficient 
justification by itself for something so complex (with potential 
implications all over the place for the whole Linux ecosystem), especially 
given the fact we already have sealed memfds zerocopy etc (and I am not 
even talking about the "infinite set-in-stone userspace API" implications 
this has).

So definitely +1 from me for this discussion to happen, being it either 
LPC (which I will unfortunately probably have to miss due to personal 
reaons this year) or KS. It might help people like me, who have trouble 
understanding why we need it, and LKML discussions don't provide enough 
answers for them.

Thanks,

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
--
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/