Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757093AbbDVN2a (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Apr 2015 09:28:30 -0400 Received: from mail-qg0-f42.google.com ([209.85.192.42]:36517 "EHLO mail-qg0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756238AbbDVN21 (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Apr 2015 09:28:27 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <553788A9.6090006@gmail.com> References: <20150413190350.GA9485@kroah.com> <8738434yjk.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <87lhhv36je.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <20150414175534.GB3974@kroah.com> <87oamhmbso.fsf_-_@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <553788A9.6090006@gmail.com> From: Havoc Pennington Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 09:27:56 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: VdwyZ6QXz9j0pbdpgKQAkr3ucQk Message-ID: Subject: Re: Issues with capability bits and meta-data in kdbus To: Austin S Hemmelgarn Cc: Linus Torvalds , Andy Lutomirski , "Eric W. Biederman" , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Andrew Morton , Arnd Bergmann , One Thousand Gnomes , Tom Gundersen , Jiri Kosina , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Daniel Mack , David Herrmann , Djalal Harouni Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2110 Lines: 45 On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 7:40 AM, Austin S Hemmelgarn wrote: > Except, IIRC, that was one of the stated design goals in the original patch > set. I'm pretty sure that i remember a rather verbose exposition that > pretty much could be summarized as "Linux has no general purpose IPC in the > kernel, this fixes that" > This is probably just debating definitions and technicalities, but what I'd say is that dbus is pretty universally applicable *within* the case of connecting apps and services on the local machine. That's what it's for. Right now it probably works for I don't know, 85-90% of that, with kdbus trying to take it closer to 100% by removing performance concerns and early boot concerns that currently rule out certain uses. If we say it isn't "general purpose" we could mean more than one thing - - it's a complete system / batteries-included, with a defined protocol, vs. a "make your own protocol" kit - it isn't especially appropriate as a cross-machine protocol, whether you mean within a cluster or across the internet - it isn't portable in a very useful way (it kind of runs on windows/mac but isn't the native way of doing things there) On the other hand, it is "general purpose" in the sense that so many apps and services are using it for so many purposes already (i.e. it isn't tied to a particular kind of app or service). I just opened d-feet on my workstation which is default-ish Fedora 21, I have ~35 well-known names available on the system bus, and ~100 (got tired of counting) on the session bus. These are all kinds of different apps and services. d-feet incidentally is a good way to explore current usage of dbus - you can list names, list objects within names, list methods/properties on objects, and even call methods from d-feet. (There are command line alternatives too like `gdbus`.) Havoc -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/