Hi Richard, At Wed, 25 Mar 2015 23:50:23 +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: > > Hi! > > Am 25.03.2015 um 15:48 schrieb Hajime Tazaki: > > > > At Tue, 24 Mar 2015 16:27:51 +0100, > > Richard Weinberger wrote: > >> > >> I'd say you should try hard to re-use/integrate your work in arch/um. > >> With um we already have an architecture which targets userspace, > >> having two needs a very good justification. > > > > in addition to the case of my previous email, libos is not > > limited to run on user-mode: it is just a library which can > > be used with various programs. thus it has a potential (not > > implemented yet) to run on a hypervisor like OSv or MirageOS > > does for application containment, or run on a bare-metal > > machine as rumpkernel does. We already have a clear > > interface for the underlying layer to be able to add such > > backend. > > > > again, it's not only for user-mode. > > > > mixing all the stuff in a single architecture may not only > > mislead to users, but also introduce conceptual-disagreements > > during code sharing of essential parts. > > > > I don't see any benefits to have a name 'um' with this idea. > > > > # I'm not saying sharing a part of code is bad idea at all, btw. > > After digging into the source I know what you mean and I have the thank you for your deep review on the source code ! > feeling that "lib" is the wrong name. > It has not much do to with an architecture. could you care to elaborate your feeling more explicitly ? what is an architecture here and what is _not_ an architecture ? is UML an architecture in your sense (probably yes, but why)? and what is arch/lib missing for an architecture ? > Apart from that, I really like your idea! great to hear that ;) > You don't implement an architecture, you take some part of Linux > (the networking stack) and create stubs around it to make it work. > That means that we'd also have to duplicate kernel functions into > arch/lib to keep it running. again, the above same questions. it (arch/lib) is a hardware-independent architecture which provides necessary features to the remainder of kernel code, isn't it ? answers to those questions are really helpful for a feedback on this RFC patches. > BTW: It does not build here: > ---cut--- > LIB liblinux-4.0.0-rc5.so fixed, thanks: though the issue was in the external code base (i.e., linux-libos-tools). there was a parallel build (make -jX) problem. # you may need to git pull at arch/lib/tools to reflect the updates. thanks. -- Hajime -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>