Merge branch 'master' into external_pager_mechanism

Conflicts:
	microkernel/mach/external_pager_mechanism.mdwn

1 files changed, 64 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/open_issues/dbus_in_linux_kernel.mdwn b/open_issues/dbus_in_linux_kernel.mdwn
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..a94e1fed
--- /dev/null
+++ b/open_issues/dbus_in_linux_kernel.mdwn
@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
+[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2010 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]]
+
+[[!meta license="""[[!toggle id="license" text="GFDL 1.2+"]][[!toggleable
+id="license" text="Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this
+document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or
+any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant
+Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts.  A copy of the license
+is included in the section entitled [[GNU Free Documentation
+License|/fdl]]."]]"""]]
+
+Might be interesting to watch how this develops.
+
+IRC, #hurd, August / September 2010
+
+    <neal> check this out:
+    <neal> someone is working on implementing dbus in linux
+    <neal> linux finally gets mach ipc ;-)
+    <marcusb> it's old news though, unless there is an update
+    <marcusb> and I think it was only the client?
+    <neal> youpi : someone is adding dbus ipc to the linux kernel
+    <neal> marcusb: I just heard about it.
+    <youpi> (it's crazy how this drives backward compared to a hurdish approach)
+    <youpi> what is the motivation for moving to the kernel?
+    <neal> context switch overhead
+    <azeem_> they wanna use it to talk to device drivers? :)
+    <kilobug> well, they did that with the in-kernel web server, but they
+      abandonned it later on
+    <neal> azeem: I don't think so.
+    <neal> dbus in the kernel is actually good for the Hurd as dbus IPC is
+      basically neutered Mach IPC
+    <marcusb> I don't think anybody wants to put the dbus server in the kernel
+    <neal> well, there is at least one person
+    <marcusb> maybe this is a different news from the one I read
+    <neal> Alban Crequy (albanc) is working out.  He works for collabora, fwiw
+
+<http://alban.apinc.org/blog/2010/09/15/d-bus-in-the-kernel-faster/>
+
+    <marcusb> what I read was about hal etc
+    <marcusb> so that you don't need a user space daemon to glue the kernel to the
+      dbus world
+    <neal> I don't think that is what he is talking about
+    <marcusb> I can't find it anymore though.  I mentioned it in this channel at
+      the time though, so it should be in the backlog
+    <marcusb> neal, yeah could very well be a separate thing
+    <marcusb> neal, dbus does have marginal support for fd passing though, and some
+      attempts on the mailing list to make "fds" an official type in the message
+      failed (as far as I could see, I didn't read the whole discussion)
+    <marcusb> so no mach ipc just yet
+    <neal> wrong
+    <neal> FD handling is in 1.4
+    <neal> type o, if I'm not mistaken
+    <marcusb> then the discussion moved on from initial rejection
+    <neal> no, 'h'
+    <marcusb> I'm out of date by two months
+    <marcusb> ok
+    <guillem> neal: AFAIR Marcel Holtmann talked about dbus in-kernel several years
+      ago, but he never ended up implementing it, or there were rumors he had
+      private "working code"
+
+  * Related Mailing List Discussion
+
+      * [\[PATCH 0/5\] RFC: Multicast and filtering features on
+        AF_UNIX](http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1040481),
+        2010-09-24