Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
kdbus in the kernel
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 24, 25, 26, 27  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Kernel & Hardware
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Naib
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5713
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 12:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lmao
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2015-October/216235.html

Kdbus is being pulled from fedora/rh... That nice attempt of a coup by systems to bypass the process showed quite clearly in practice the flaws
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ct85711
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Sep 2005
Posts: 1726

PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 3:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Now, hopefully the devs will scrap kdbus as a whole and throw it away....

It's been said, that most of the reason to make kdbus is because of dbus inefficiencies. Maybe they'll figure it out and remake dbus and be done with everything...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
davidm
Guru
Guru


Joined: 26 Apr 2009
Posts: 557
Location: US

PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 4:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naib wrote:
Lmao
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2015-October/216235.html

Kdbus is being pulled from fedora/rh... That nice attempt of a coup by systems to bypass the process showed quite clearly in practice the flaws

I'm using systemd on Gentoo myself but OUCH. I do think they need to slow down, focus more on quality and be far less pushy. Make people want to switch by killing them with the features and the stability and not by forcing them to do so with underhanded tricks and power plays.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Anon-E-moose
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 4343
Location: Dallas area

PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 5:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

From the Naib link:
Quote:
The upstream developers asked me to remove the module from Fedora while they rethink some of the approach they are taking with kdbus.


Maybe the NAKS from the kernel devs, everytime they have asked for it to be included in the kernel, is starting to sink in.
Either that or they have found out that the "vast gains" of using kdbus aren't that vast after all.
_________________
Asus m5a99fx, FX 8320 - nouveau, oss4, rx550 for qemu passthrough
Acer laptop E5-575, i3-7100u - i965, alsa
---both---
5.0.13 zen kernel, profile 17.1 (no-pie & modified) amd64-no-multilib
gcc 8.2.0, eudev, openrc, openbox, palemoon
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5713
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 5:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

what's just as interesting was Fedora failed a few internal reviews and F23 wasn't going to be released. Today... it now passes and F23 is being released.
related or co-incidental?
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
depontius
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 3406

PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 7:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anon-E-moose wrote:
Either that or they have found out that the "vast gains" of using kdbus aren't that vast after all.


The gains may be measured in lock-in, not performance. The latter may be minor compared to the former.

The real question here is how fast after kdbus goes into the kernel, presuming it does, will someone (GKH?) call for removal of netlink as a method of reporting udev events? You know, the lock-in of systemd as the one true whatchamacallit. (I use that term because it's fearfully more than an init system.)
_________________
.sigs waste space and bandwidth
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
khayyam
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6228
Location: Room 101

PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 7:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

davidm wrote:
I'm using systemd on Gentoo myself but OUCH. I do think they need to slow down, focus more on quality and be far less pushy. Make people want to switch by killing them with the features and the stability and not by forcing them to do so with underhanded tricks and power plays.

davidm ... but those are the "features" ...

"systemd is poorly designed? Its claims, wrt the "brokeness" of the function systemd intended to replace, or its own "features", are spurious? No, it has innovative underhanded tricks and power plays ... haytre".

The problem with systemd is that its now like the boy who cried wolf, no one should give it, or its adherents, any credence.

best ... khay
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
roki942
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 18 Apr 2005
Posts: 285
Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 7:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Can I be the first to say it?

"LP this is your wake up call!"

edit:
Oops, my bad .... that sounds personal, but I never met the guy.

Should have been: "Systemd this is your wake up call!"


Last edited by roki942 on Fri Oct 30, 2015 9:33 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GFCCAE6xF
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 06 Aug 2012
Posts: 267

PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 8:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naib wrote:
what's just as interesting was Fedora failed a few internal reviews and F23 wasn't going to be released. Today... it now passes and F23 is being released.
related or co-incidental?


Leave it for the reader to research :)
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/kernel.git/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
steveL
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery

PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 10:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

GFCCAE6xF wrote:
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/kernel.git/

Lol:
Code:
Drop kdbus     Lines -52081/+3
The whole of the "UNIX Operating System Source Code Level Six", as presented in Lions[1], is 9073 lines.

[1] Lions' Commentary on UNIX 6th Edition with Source Code (John Lions, 1977, published: 1996 Peer-to-Peer.)
Sure, it's a "specially-edited selection" but the point stands. According to ESR in the foreword, it's the "entire source of the UNIX Version 6 kernel."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gwr
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 19 Nov 2014
Posts: 194

PostPosted: Sat Oct 31, 2015 11:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

steveL wrote:
GFCCAE6xF wrote:
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/kernel.git/

Lol:
Code:
Drop kdbus     Lines -52081/+3
The whole of the "UNIX Operating System Source Code Level Six", as presented in Lions[1], is 9073 lines.

[1] Lions' Commentary on UNIX 6th Edition with Source Code (John Lions, 1977, published: 1996 Peer-to-Peer.)
Sure, it's a "specially-edited selection" but the point stands. According to ESR in the foreword, it's the "entire source of the UNIX Version 6 kernel."


The vast majority of lines of code appears to be the endlessly verbose XML documention that is needlessly intermixed with the source code.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
steveL
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery

PostPosted: Sat Oct 31, 2015 5:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

gwr wrote:
The vast majority of lines of code appears to be the endlessly verbose XML documentation that is needlessly intermixed with the source code.
*shudder* ;)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 44226
Location: 56N 3W

PostPosted: Sat Oct 31, 2015 5:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There has to be a halloween reference to kdbus there somewhere but I can't spot it.
_________________
Regards,

NeddySeagoon

Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5713
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Sat Oct 31, 2015 5:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NeddySeagoon wrote:
There has to be a halloween reference to kdbus there somewhere but I can't spot it.
the dead will rise again?
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
depontius
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 3406

PostPosted: Sat Oct 31, 2015 6:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naib wrote:
NeddySeagoon wrote:
There has to be a halloween reference to kdbus there somewhere but I can't spot it.
the dead will rise again?


Oh, come on! It's obvious... "Trick or Treat!" (with a higher probability of the former, most here would say)
_________________
.sigs waste space and bandwidth
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
khayyam
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6228
Location: Room 101

PostPosted: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

depontius wrote:
Naib wrote:
NeddySeagoon wrote:
There has to be a halloween reference to kdbus there somewhere but I can't spot it.
the dead will rise again?

Oh, come on! It's obvious... "Trick or Treat!" (with a higher probability of the former, most here would say)

no, no, "all your base are belong to us" ... as the new improved halloween is 365 days a year.

best ... khay
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
steveL
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery

PostPosted: Sun Nov 01, 2015 2:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Enough with the quote trees already: flatten 'em out, people! ;x
NeddySeagoon wrote:
There has to be a halloween reference to kdbus there somewhere but I can't spot it.

Naib wrote:
the dead will rise again?

depontius wrote:
Oh, come on! It's obvious... "Trick or Treat!" (with a higher probability of the former, most here would say)

"Trick or Trick" ;) (story)
khayyam wrote:
no, no, "all your base are belong to us" ... as the new improved halloween is 365 days a year.

Heh: "All your Data are belong to US" seems apposite.

Though "All your data belong to us" is a different matter, relating to the freedom of information implicit in the "digital age", and the rights of everyone to knowledge, since all knowledge we have comes from our society.

That's why the sociopathic fantasy of the "Nietschzian Superman" is so useless; as if no-one ever had to change his dirty nappy.. ;-)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gwr
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 19 Nov 2014
Posts: 194

PostPosted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 12:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Article: kdbus not dead - from the systemd conference

http://www.golem.de/news/systemd-konferenz-kdbus-ist-nicht-tot-1511-117313.html

From Google Translate:

Quote:

The systemd maintainer Lennart Poettering reaffirmed a developer conference that kdbus will continue hand and "not dead". The implementation in the kernel and userspace will however rebuilt. How long that will take, is not yet clear.

For more than two years working Linux hackers and the systemd team with kdbus on implementing an interprocess communication (IPC) at the kernel level, which is a kind of replica of the previous D-Bus functionality. Systemd-founder Lennart Poettering has "not exactly a success story," described the development of this technology at the Conference as systemd, which is primarily due to the criticism from the kernel community well. But Poettering said just as clearly: "kdbus is not dead".

The presence of the IPC in the kernel is necessary, for example to already be able to communicate early in the boot process it. The need to use tools like NetworkD. But despite these repeated statements on the need for clear kdbus, the systemd team asked two weeks ago about that kdbus module will be removed from the kernel of Fedora Rawhide development branch. This seems like a harsh step backwards. Had the team but only this summer recommended a large-scale test using the module.
Kdbus is rebuilt

Actually, however, this is only a strategic "step back". Because According to Poettering of the team is just starting with major reconstruction work on kdbus. So currently would be implemented to the classic D-Bus in the kernel still a lot of compatibility. In future this will probably be outsourced, so should about the semantics are implemented in userspace. But yet it is not clear how much of the code will ultimately changed because the work on it are still running.

In an interview with Golem.de confirmed Poettering that will be discussed with the renovation work on some of the criticism from the kernel community. The work could lead to a more generic IPC. Presumably, the technology has thus also a greater chance of being taken up in the medium term but still in the Linux kernel.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Anon-E-moose
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 4343
Location: Dallas area

PostPosted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 2:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

gwr wrote:
Article: kdbus not dead - from the systemd conference

http://www.golem.de/news/systemd-konferenz-kdbus-ist-nicht-tot-1511-117313.html


Even if it never gets included in the kernel (like bfs, bfq and reiser4 to name a few) it doesn't mean it's dead.
They can carry the patches to the kernel and all the distros can apply it along with many others that they apply anyway.

I'm only really concerned that kdbus doesn't make it into the kernel with the (crappy) code that they've had in the past.
I'm sure there will be lots of commentary on lkml over it when the rewrite gets released.
_________________
Asus m5a99fx, FX 8320 - nouveau, oss4, rx550 for qemu passthrough
Acer laptop E5-575, i3-7100u - i965, alsa
---both---
5.0.13 zen kernel, profile 17.1 (no-pie & modified) amd64-no-multilib
gcc 8.2.0, eudev, openrc, openbox, palemoon
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gwr
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 19 Nov 2014
Posts: 194

PostPosted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 2:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anon-E-moose wrote:
lots of commentary on lkml over it when the rewrite gets released.


I find it interesting that they wish to re-architect it, given that they just finished trying to push it into the kernel and fought bitterly that it was ready.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
steveL
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery

PostPosted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 3:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
The presence of the IPC in the kernel is necessary, for example to already be able to communicate early in the boot process it. The need to use tools like NetworkD. But despite these repeated statements on the clear need for kdbus

Nah, these statements are simply bullshit, that's why no-one's playing with your square ball..

IPC is necessary in the kernel, sure, but that's why we have at least 5 variants of it already.
Quote:
Actually, however, this is only a strategic "step back".

Well, how about a "strategic" decision: NO. You do not know what you are doing, and everything you are trying to do is better done using existing facilities, while forgetting about some of the idiot design "constraints" inflicted by your wilful ignorance and lack of basic research, plus a large dose of intransigence (ie: pig-headed behaviour.)

Poettering, Sievers and Kroah-Hartman are simply not qualified to architect such solutions, and the pain they have inflicted on admins and users over the last 7 or 8 years must stop.

Go away. Perhaps move into management, with the rest of the bulshytters, and let the Peter principle continue.
Quote:
In an interview with Golem.de confirmed Poettering that will be discussed with the renovation work on some of the criticism from the kernel community. The work could lead to a more generic IPC. Presumably, the technology has thus also a greater chance of being taken up in the medium term but still in the Linux kernel.

It's called TIPC, and it's already in the kernel, and has been available for Linux for 15 years. It also happens to be multi-platform.

"Catch-up with the modern-world, numpty; we sorted this stuff out in the 1990s, while you guys were gawking at your first view of a WIMP display (done badly.)"
~ Unix-greybeard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gwr
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 19 Nov 2014
Posts: 194

PostPosted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 7:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

steveL wrote:

It's called TIPC, and it's already in the kernel, and has been available for Linux for 15 years. It also happens to be multi-platform.


I can't give conference talks and impress my fans with old technology.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
krinn
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 7200

PostPosted: Sat Nov 07, 2015 10:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

steveL wrote:
It's called TIPC

From the features list on the wikipedia link, i see it really lack the feature
- Made by Pottering.

As such, i don't think they would use it, as this missing is a huge stopper.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
steveL
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery

PostPosted: Sat Nov 07, 2015 12:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

steveL wrote:
It's called TIPC, and it's already in the kernel, and has been available for Linux for 15 years. It also happens to be multi-platform.

gwr wrote:
I can't give conference talks and impress my fans with old technology.

Lul.. the saps could just run dcop over TIPC, and it would all be about the uses they put the technology to: that would get them loads of new conference material, about how efficient they were being, on the one hand, and about how the desktop apps were run over domain-specific, tuned mechanisms, rather than clumped through one badly-designed bottleneck ("now in 60 moving parts!")

They could even use capnrpc, and compare against a forked X, running under the logged-in user's uid, since it has an inter-desktop app-protocol already (or used to.)

There's plenty of fun stuff to be done (or brought-back), for people who actually have the time and inclination to work on it.

Just follow the advice of the kernel network hackers, and focus on the fun part in userland, instead of trying to hijack Linux.
Do this by understanding all the options available, from POSIX first, so that your apps run on other systems too, and select the ones which are most suited, rather than just what some nub told you to use, for those rare, but important, parts where you're not using a library.
krinn wrote:
From the features list on the wikipedia link, i see it really lack the feature
- Made by Pottering.

As such, i don't think they would use it, as this missing is a huge stopper.

Hah; well you called it:
krinn wrote:
does anyone think we're close to have a new challenger for the "software fiasco of the year" with kdbus?

What will be interesting is what redhat will do, sure they can have a patch kernel for themselves, calling it a fork or not, but it's personal use. Now if systemd depend on that patch (so systemd need a kernel with kdbus patch), that would force anyone to use a kernel with the patch (so a non vanilla kernel anymore), and write in stone redhat has fork the kernel.
And how distro will look at this: getting deeper redhat dependent or finally back to sanity and dropping systemd and all the shit.

and here we are, 5 months later:
Naib wrote:
Lmao
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2015-October/216235.html

Kdbus is being pulled from fedora/rh... That nice attempt of a coup by systemd to bypass the process showed quite clearly in practice the flaws

Hopefully, the Linux kernel bods will reconsider the lazy-thinking that says "let's hand over all control of cgroups to systemd" as well.
(discussed here and further below.)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
krinn
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 7200

PostPosted: Sat Nov 07, 2015 2:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

steveL wrote:
Hah; well you called it:
krinn wrote:
does anyone think we're close to have a new challenger for the "software fiasco of the year" with kdbus?

By that time, i didn't want to push my seer capacity as most unbelievers are always shocked when i do ; i think now everyone can just admit it: krinn is a seer!
My only regret, is that it looks like Redhat may not be pushing systemd (like i suppose earlier).
But i'm just a seer, never said i was God (i could, but i will wait until everyone admit my seer status first).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Kernel & Hardware All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 24, 25, 26, 27  Next
Page 25 of 27

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum