On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 9:24 PM, Matthew Mondor <mm_li...@pulsar-zone.net> wrote: > (...) > Which makes me wonder: should there be a feature to optionally link > kernel-level scripts with the kernel image, so that with monolithic > setups, file system script loading could be disabled, without affecting > future functionality that might depend on kernel-space Lua scripts? By > extension, perhaps that kernel-space scripts could be provided as part > of kernel modules, which can already be either built monolithic or > modular. I know linking text (or bytecode) blobs after an objcopy step > would be easily, as well as mapping them to names which a loader can > look for, but I'm not familiar enough with the new modular system to > know if this is realistic without too much effort.
It is already possible to embed scripts in the kernel image or in kernel modules. However, I think that you are missing the main point of having a scripting language in-kernel. Yes, a scripting language is useful for kernel developers extending their own subsystem/module or even to develop it, but (IMHO) the real strength of having a scripting language in-kernel is to allow users/applications to adapt the kernel operation to their needs. My proposal isn't to write a kernel in Lua, but to empower users to adjust the kernel behavior by writing Lua scripts. I think that would be very useful to distribute official scripts, but it would be even more useful to let users to adapt these scripts to their needs. For example, a data center administrator could define his own policy to schedule processes and to manage the power usage; a network administrator could completely tune the network traffic processing; a cluster user could receive a time slot to his processes and manage it with his own rules; and so on.. Cheers, -- Lourival Vieira Neto
