Originally posted by anda_skoa
View Post
Except kdbus and bus1 were not in fact broker-less these were both move the broker into the kernel. With the Linux kernel developers going is this not just duplicating what AF_UNIX + LSM do anyhow.
Originally posted by anda_skoa
View Post
Originally posted by anda_skoa
View Post
Yes using AF_UNIX this integrates with the OS security straight off no special handling
Originally posted by anda_skoa
View Post
Remember dbus broker and dbus daemon has to run special processing code to support linux kernel LSM security control.
Originally posted by anda_skoa
View Post
Originally posted by anda_skoa
View Post
Absolutely not different to X11 for X11 IPC use cases. X11 application to windows manager or X11 application to X11 compositor and so on is the same basic diagram.
Originally posted by anda_skoa
View Post
Originally posted by anda_skoa
View Post
anda skoa direct sockets like varlink uses it also better for the kernel scheduler to correctly share allocated CPU time. There are lot of issues with portals that happen because CPU time is not being correctly allocated and this is because of dbus broker/deamon hiding from the kernel what dbus service an application needs. This is why I question is dbus the right solution or should we follow systemd lead and start migrating to varlink or something else like it.
There is a lot of cpu resource sharing code with Linux/BSD with AF_Unix that you cannot use effectively with man in middle like dbus.
Yes it this stuff where putting a dbus broker in the Linux kernel and made it work right was just going to come implement AF_Unix in Linux kernel twice. Yes one verson normal AF_Unix and the second version AF_Unix for dbus with enough extras to make code maintenance totally evil.
Varlink goes what can we do if we just work with what AF_Unix provides with no man in middle turns out a hell of a lot. Yes someone decide to make a true brokerless design todo most of the same roles as dbus with varlink. Systemd few extra addons make varlink very much usable as a dbus replacement.
I somehow think dbus is a mistake caused by attempting to be cross platform back in the day.
Comment