Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [ANNOUNCE] Kernel Generalized Event Management | From | Bob Bennett <> | Date | Tue, 31 Aug 2004 11:29:43 -0400 |
| |
On Mon, 2004-08-30 at 18:39, Chris Wright wrote:
> So, why so much patch to do what's already available in the kernel? With > LSM, plus audit, you can generate events that userspace can consume via > netlink w/out this /proc stuff, and sys_call_table symbol lookup stuff, > the kernel hooks, etc. > I am looking into netlink implementation. If it performs better, there is no reason not to use it. My intention is to provide a method for handling _synchronous_ event notification, in a general enough way so that it can be useful to a variety of userspace applications, and be reasonably simple for an app to use. The /proc implementation filled that need. Additionally, with netlink, it looks like I will need a dedicated kernel thread that receives responses on the socket and wakes up waiting tasks.
It appears that Robert Love's Kernel Events Layer project is attempting to address a lot of these event management issues. An alternative is to build upon this project to support synchronous event handling as well as the event broadcasting that it performs now.
As for hooks, LSM and audit do provide all the callouts I need for generating events in 2.6. The module that did sys_call_table lookup was developed for working with 2.4 kernels that don't have LSM patch applied, and should not have been included in the 2.6 patch.
thanks, Bob
> How about starting by showing exactly what pieces are missing in the > kernel? This looks like things that can easily be done using existing > infrastructure. > > thanks, > -chris
- 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/
| |