Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

It's Been A Quiet Year-End For BUS1, The Proposed In-Kernel IPC For Linux

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • It's Been A Quiet Year-End For BUS1, The Proposed In-Kernel IPC For Linux

    Phoronix: It's Been A Quiet Year-End For BUS1, The Proposed In-Kernel IPC For Linux

    With the Linux 4.10 kernel merge window expected to open this weekend, I was digging around to see whether there was anything new on the BUS1 front and whether we might see it for the next kernel cycle...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...-Year-End-2016

  • #2
    If you send me an email next time, I'd be happy to fill you in on the current status.

    Comment


    • #3
      they are unable to develop this software.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by tomegun View Post
        If you send me an email next time, I'd be happy to fill you in on the current status.
        So can you please fill us in. What's the status? What is the expected target for inclusion? What is the idea with that bus2 branch?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by quikee View Post
          So can you please fill us in. What's the status? What is the expected target for inclusion? What is the idea with that bus2 branch?
          Yes, please do. Instead just complaining, please provide useful information about the topic too. As I always seen, Linux developers needs to be smarter at PR.

          Comment


          • #6
            Is the motivation behind this to evolve linux to a microkernel?

            Comment


            • #7
              BTW, are there any recordings available from Linux Plumbers 2016?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by quikee View Post

                So can you please fill us in. What's the status? What is the expected target for inclusion? What is the idea with that bus2 branch?
                In short:
                bus2 is supposed to be high-level cross-platform API compatible with Windows Data Copy, but because of licensing issues bus2 is supposed to be taken over by Microsoft and licensed in the Linux kernel under a permissive license.

                If bus2 fails, there's still plans to ship bus1 with the Linux kernel.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by cl333r View Post

                  In short:
                  bus2 is supposed to be high-level cross-platform API compatible with Windows Data Copy, but because of licensing issues bus2 is supposed to be taken over by Microsoft and licensed in the Linux kernel under a permissive license.

                  If bus2 fails, there's still plans to ship bus1 with the Linux kernel.
                  And the reasoning for making it cross-platform is? Sounds weird to me.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
                    And the reasoning for making it cross-platform is? Sounds weird to me.
                    I smell trolling...

                    Michael: Any official news?

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X