What about UML? I'm using KVM but asking for the sake of argument. 2015-07-29 23:03 GMT+02:00 Manish Katiyar <mkatiyar@xxxxxxxxx>: > On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Greg Freemyer <greg.freemyer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 4:23 PM, Manish Katiyar <mkatiyar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 1:07 PM, Jeff Haran <Jeff.Haran@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>-----Original Message----- >>>>>From: kernelnewbies-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:kernelnewbies- >>>>>bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Manish Katiyar >>>>>Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 11:51 AM >>>>>To: kernelnewbies >>>>>Subject: Kernel development using linux containers (LXC ) ? >>>>> >>>>>Hi, >>>>> >>>>>I've been playing and reading about control groups and linux containers >>>>>recently and was wondering if there are any existing recipes on how to setup >>>>>a kernel environment in containers. Google hasn't been helpful so far (or >>>>>maybe I'm not searching properly). >>>>> >>>>>I've used VMs for dev in past (Qemu, uml etc.), but looks like it may be >>>>>interesting to have it in containers. Given that they share they same OS image >>>>>as host, I'm not sure if its possible without making the host OS crash. >>>>> >>>>>Any suggestions. >>>>> >>>>>Thanks - >>>>>Manish >>>> >>>> I'm not sure what your goal is here, but it sounds to me like you might want to be googling for "linux namespaces". >>> >>> I'm sorry. I see that my previous mail had a key word "development" >>> missing. What I was trying to find out was that is it possible to >>> setup and use linux containers/cgroups to do kernel development. >>> Things like writing and test kernel modules, debugging kernel, >>> attaching gdb etc. etc. which normally require Qemu, busybox or other >>> VM techniques since containers are much lightweight and if anyone has >>> recipes for that setup to do development without crashing the host OS. >>> >>> Any hints appreciated. I looked for "linux namespaces" but it doesn't >>> give me what I want. >>> >> >> I have no first hand experience, but I don't think containers have the >> flexibility you need. Docker in particular shares the kernel with the >> host OS as far as I know, so it would not be of any value that I can >> see. >> >> I think a unikernel may be what you are looking for: >> >> http://www.linux.com/news/enterprise/cloud-computing/821243-unikernel-use-cases-containers >> >> My understanding is that with a unikernel you can move targeted >> portions of the Hypervisor kernel up into the unikernel. Thus if you >> wanted to work on a network driver, you could implement it in a >> unikernel. Then if it blew up you would fall back to the hypervisor >> level, kill the unikernel and try again. >> >> The Rump kernel (a unikernel) in particular might be a good option: >> >> == >> Rump Kernels — provide free, portable, componentized, kernel quality >> drivers such as file systems, POSIX system call handlers, PCI device >> drivers, a SCSI protocol stack, virtio and a TCP/IP stack. These >> drivers may be integrated into existing systems, or run as stand-alone >> unikernels on cloud hypervisors and embedded systems. >> == >> >> I have no first hand experience with the Rump Kernel, so I don't know >> if it would work as a way to do linux kernel development or not. It >> certainly seems like a great environment for generic kernel >> development. > > Thanks a lot GregF/GregKH, > > That's what I suspected, that it might not be possible because of > both sharing the same OS. I'll have a look at Rump Kernels and see how > far it goes. Thanks for the pointers ! > > _______________________________________________ > Kernelnewbies mailing list > Kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies _______________________________________________ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
