lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jun]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: AF_BUS socket address family
On Fri, 29 Jun 2012 20:13:50 -0400
Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@kvack.org> wrote:

> On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 12:42:30AM +0100, Vincent Sanders wrote:
> > The current users are suffering from the issues outlined in my
> > introductory mail all the time. These issues are caused by emulating an
> > IPC system over AF_UNIX in userspace.
>
> Nothing in your introductory statements indicate how your requirements
> can't be met through a hybrid socket + shared memory solution. The IPC
> facilities of the kernel are already quite rich, and sufficient for
> building many kinds of complex systems. What's so different about DBus'
> requirements?

dbus wants to
- multicast
- pass file handles
- never lose an event
- be fast
- have a security model

The security model makes a shared memory hack impractical, the file
handle passing means at least some of it needs to be AF_UNIX. The event
loss handling/speed argue for putting it in kernel.

I'm not convinced AF_BUS entirely sorts this either. In particular the
failure case dbus currently has to handle for not losing events allows it
to identify who in a "group" has jammed the bus by not listening (eg by
locking up). This information appears to be lost in the AF_BUS case and
that's slightly catastrophic for error recovery.

Alan


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-06-30 15:01    [W:0.091 / U:0.080 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site