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: <5540F081.9090005@redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 29 Apr 2015 16:53:53 +0200
From:	Harald Hoyer <harald@...hat.com>
To:	Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
CC:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] kdbus for 4.1-rc1

On 29.04.2015 16:18, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Am 29.04.2015 um 16:11 schrieb Harald Hoyer:
>>>> We don't handcraft the initramfs script for every our customers, therefore we
>>>> have to generically support hotplug, persistent device names, persistent
>>>> interface names, network connectivity in the initramfs, user input handling for
>>>> passwords, fonts, keyboard layouts, fips, fsck, repair tools for file systems,
>>>> raid assembly, LVM assembly, multipath, crypto devices, live images, iSCSI,
>>>> FCoE, all kinds of filesystems with their quirks, IBM z-series support, resume
>>>> from hibernation, […]
>>>
>>> This is correct. But which of these tools/features depend on dbus?
>>
>> I would love to add dbus support to all of them and use it, so I can connect
>> them all more easily. No need for them to invent their own version of IPC,
>> which can only be used by their own tool set.
> 
> Why/how do you need to connect them?
> Sorry for being persistent but as I use most of these tools too (also in initramfs)
> I'm very curious.
> 
> Many of us grumpy kernel devs simply don't know all the use case of you have to cover.
> So, please explain. :-)
> 

Well, using shell scripts I connected all of these tools in the earlier
versions of dracut [1]. Been there, done that.

When using bash to wait for an interface to come up [2] or doing dhcp [3], the
(at least my) pain threshold is reached, and you want something more sophisticated.

So, one starts eyeing NetworkManager or systemd-networkd. Both of them have CLI
tools and helpers and these tools and helpers talk to each other with (guess
what?) an IPC mechanism, which happens to be DBUS (because it's the IPC of
choice, if you don't want to reinvent the wheel).

But let's not pinpoint that to network alone. Parsing output of tools with
shell scripts is horrible, slow, fragile, error prone.

Sure, I can write one binary to rule them all, pull out all the code from all
tools I need, but for me an IPC mechanism sounds a lot better. And it should be
_one_ common IPC mechanism and not a plethora of them. It should feel like an
operating system and not like a bunch of thrown together software, which is
glued together with some magic shell scripts.

[1] https://dracut.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Main_Page
[2]
http://git.kernel.org/cgit/boot/dracut/dracut.git/tree/modules.d/40network/net-lib.sh#n483
[3] http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/dhcp.git/tree/dhclient-script
--
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/