Re: [PATCH v3 00/13] Add kdbus implementation

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 04:31:55AM +0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:

On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 09:19:06PM +0100, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:

quoted

These two statements somehow contradict. From my admittedly very
limited experience, I never used D-Bus because it did not
fit my usage scenarios: I never needed a bus, only point-to-point
links like pipes or sockets.

Great, then you don't need this, no need to worry about it at all, why
are we having this conversation? :)

Well, for one because that's what I wanted to find out...

quoted

Well, it made your intentions a bit clearer, but it does
not help to sell kdbus to me, sorry ;-/

It's not my "goal" to sell kdbus to you, if you don't want it, great,

I used this language because I think you're not providing
the facts that would allow me to judge for myself whether
kdbus is a good idea.  Those automotive applications you
were talking about, what was the OS they were ported from
and what was the messaging API they used?

But odds are, you are using a system with D-Bus today, if not, then you
are using Linux in a very specific and limited manner, which is
wonderful, in that case this whole thread isn't really pertinent.

Lots of people do use D-Bus, and for those users, that is what this
patchset is for.

As I said before, I'm seeing about a dozen D-Bus messages per minute,
nothing that would justify adding kdbus to the kernel for
performance reasons.  Wrt security I'm also not aware of any
open issues with D-Bus.  Thus I doubt normal users of D-Bus
would see any benefit from kdbus.  I also think none of the
applications I can install from my distribution has any performance
issue with D-Bus.

And this is the point where I ask myself if I missed something.


Thanks,
Johannes