Re: [PATCH 01/13] kdbus: add documentation

Hi Andy,

On 02/02/2015 09:12 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:

On Feb 2, 2015 1:34 AM, "Daniel Mack" [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

That's right, but again - if an application wants to gather this kind of
information about tasks it interacts with, it can do so today by looking
at /proc or similar sources. Desktop machines do exactly that already,
and the kernel code executed in such cases very much resembles that in
metadata.c, and is certainly not cheaper. kdbus just makes such
information more accessible when requested. Which information is
collected is defined by bit-masks on both the sender and the receiver
connection, and most applications will effectively only use a very
limited set by default if they go through one of the more high-level
libraries.

I should rephrase a bit.  Kdbus doesn't require use of send-time
metadata.  It does, however, strongly encourage it, and it sounds like

On the kernel level, kdbus just *offers* that, just like sockets offer
SO_PASSCRED. On the userland level, kdbus helps applications get that
information race-free, easier and faster than they would otherwise.

systemd and other major users will use send-time metadata.  Once that
happens, it's ABI (even if it's purely in userspace), and changing it
is asking for security holes to pop up.  So you'll be mostly stuck
with it.

We know we can't break the ABI. At most, we could deprecate item types
and introduce new ones, but we want to avoid that by all means of
course. However, I fail to see how that is related to send time
metadata, or even to kdbus in general, as all ABIs have to be kept stable.

Do you have some simple benchmark code you can share?  I'd like to
play with it a bit.

Sure, it's part of the self-test suite. Call it with "-t benchmark" to
run the benchmark as isolated test with verbose output. The code for
that lives in test-benchmark.c.


Thanks,
Daniel