Hi, On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 3:27 PM, James Bottomley <james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com> wrote: > > This is why I think kdbus is a bad idea: it solidifies as a linux kernel > API something which runs counter to granular OS virtualization (and > something which caused Windows to fall behind Linux in the container > space). Splitting out the acceleration problem and leaving the rest to > user space currently looks fine because the ideas Al and Andy are > kicking around don't cause problems with OS virtualization. >
I'm interested in understanding this problem (if only for my own curiosity) but I'm not confident I understand what you're saying correctly. Can I try to explain back / ask questions and see what I have right? I think you are saying that if an application relies on a system service (= any other process that runs on the system bus) then to virtualize that app by itself in a dedicated container, the system bus and the system service need to also be in the container. So the container ends up with a bunch of stuff in it beyond only the application. Right / wrong / confused? I also think you're saying that userspace dbus has the same issue (this isn't a userspace vs. kernel thing per se), the objection to kdbus is that it makes this issue more solidified / harder to fix? Do you have ideas on how to go about fixing it, whether in userspace or kernel dbus? Havoc -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
