dbus moving into kernel?

Patryk Benderz Patryk.Benderz at esp.pl
Mon Sep 20 13:09:34 CEST 2010

Dnia 2010-09-20, pon o godzinie 11:32 +0100, Tilman Baumann pisze:
> Patryk Benderz wrote:
> > Dnia 2010-09-16, czw o godzinie 17:23 +0100, Al Johnson pisze:
> >> kdbus is proof-of-concept at the moment, the idea being to reduce the
> >> number
> >> of context switches needed for each dbus message. One synthetic
> >> benchmark
> >> shows a 3x speed increase on the n900 but speedup in real world
> >> applications
> >> seems much more modest.
> >
> > There are a lot of complaints about Dbus IPC. That makes me wonder why
> > people don't use one of already existing kernel IPCs [1][2] , and
> > instead try to develop another one, which is not secure as I heard?
> > [1] http://tldp.org/LDP/lpg/node7.html
> > [2] http://tldp.org/LDP/tlk/ipc/ipc.html
> Actually, netlink comes to mind as a transport layer for something like dbus.
> It can not all that dbus can, but most of those so called features are
> actually a total wank anyway. At least it would scale.
> But I suppose this discussion was lost when dbus was new and it is
> pointless these days. Dbus will probably have a successor some day, and
> with any luck it will have more sane foundations...
> Actually, dbus is not that bad. Some of the things it can do require a
> approach like they took. Question is, should we have sacrificed those
> features on the alter of simplicity? I'm not even sure I have a answer to
> that...
Nor do I. However I suppose Dbus should have been designed and built
conforming to Unix Philosophy [1], and it seems it was not.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_philosophy

Patryk "LeadMan" Benderz
Linux Registered User #377521
()  ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail 
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   - against proprietary attachments

More information about the community mailing list