lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Mar]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 00/11] an introduction of library operating system for Linux (LibOS)
Am 24.03.2015 um 15:25 schrieb Hajime Tazaki:
> At Tue, 24 Mar 2015 14:21:49 +0100,
> Richard Weinberger wrote:
>>
>> Am 24.03.2015 um 14:10 schrieb Hajime Tazaki:
>> > == More information ==
>>>
>>> The crucial difference between UML (user-mode linux) and this approach
>>> is that we allow multiple network stack instances to co-exist within a
>>> single process with dlmopen(3) like linking for easy debugging.
>>
>> Is this the only difference?
>> We already have arch/um, why do you need arch/lib/ then?
>> My point is, can't you merge your arch/lib into the existing arch/um stuff?
>> From a very rough look your arch/lib seems like a micro UML.
>
> I understand your point.
> but ptrace(2) based system call interception used by UML
> makes it depend on the host OS (i.e., linux kernel), while
> LibOS uses symbol hijacking with weak alias and LD_PRELOAD.
>
> we're really thinking to run this library on other
> POSIX-like hosts (e.g., osx) though it's not coming yet.

Yeah, but this does not mean that arch/um and arch/lib can't coexist in arch/um.
Maybe you can add a "library operation mode" to UML.
I'll happily help you in that area.

>> BTW: There was already an idea for having UML as regular library.
>> See: http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net/old/projects.html
>> "UML as a normal userspace library"
>
> thanks, it's new information for me.
> were there any trial on this idea ?

IIRC Jeff (the original author of UML) wanted to create a special linker script
such that you can build UML as shared object.

Thanks,
//richard


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-03-24 15:41    [W:1.562 / U:0.088 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site