Re: [LAU] 200 lines kernel patch

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: <linux-audio-user@...>
Date: Wednesday, November 24, 2010 - 6:55 am

http://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/415740/54028f24b103f4ff/
...............................
"Most outspoken - as he often is - is Lennart Poettering, who asserted
that "Binding something like this to TTYs is just backwards"; he would
rather see something which is based on sessions. And, he said, all of
this could better be done in user space. Linus was, to put it
politely, unimpressed, but Lennart came back with a few lines of bash
scripting which achieves the same result as Mike's patch - with no
kernel patching required at all. It turns out that working with
control groups is not necessarily that hard."
................................

Have these people arguing against Lennart ever heard of GUI apps? And
what exactly is the "TTY" of an application "in the cloud." And how
exactly would keying off the tty be used in a paravirtualized kernel?

For example, many GUI based programs run out of pty's by running
subprocesses or networked subprocesses. This includes applications
based on libexpect(3), Qt apps using QProcess, or emacs subprocesses.
How would this silly kernel-bloating hack work with such programs?

So IMHO, this is design based on the flawed logic of "If the only tool
you have is a terminal emulator everything begins to look like a text
based program"

Lennart agrees:

http://lwn.net/Articles/415756/
...............
"Well, this feature is pretty much interesting only for kernel hackers
anyway. It is completely irrelevant for normal desktop people. Because
a) normal users don't use many terminals anyway and that very seldom and
b) if they do that they do not create gazillion of processes from one of
the terminals and only very few in the other. Because only then this
patch becomes relevant.

Heck, the patch wouldn't even have any effect on my machine (and I am
hacker), because I tend to run my builds from within emacs. And since
emacs has no TTY (since it is a X11/gtk build) it wouldn't be in its own
scheduling group."
.....................

-- Niels
http://nielsmayer.com
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[LAU] 200 lines kernel patch, Atte André Jensen, (Sat Nov 20, 9:48 am)
Re: [LAU] 200 lines kernel patch, Paul Davis, (Sat Nov 20, 1:26 pm)
Re: [LAU] 200 lines kernel patch, torbenh, (Sat Nov 20, 6:33 pm)
Re: [LAU] 200 lines kernel patch, Ray Rashif, (Sat Nov 20, 6:38 pm)
Re: [LAU] 200 lines kernel patch, Jouni Rinne, (Sun Nov 21, 12:44 pm)
Re: [LAU] 200 lines kernel patch, Paul Davis, (Sun Nov 21, 1:43 pm)
[LAU] Gentoo jack wiki page wrong? (was Re: 200 lines kernel..., Bearcat M. Sandor, (Mon Nov 22, 8:41 pm)
Re: [LAU] 200 lines kernel patch, Atte André Jensen, (Mon Nov 22, 10:14 am)
Re: [LAU] 200 lines kernel patch, torbenh, (Mon Nov 22, 1:20 pm)
Re: [LAU] 200 lines kernel patch, Darrin Thompson, (Mon Nov 22, 6:21 pm)
Re: [LAU] 200 lines kernel patch, Chris Cannam, (Mon Nov 22, 9:56 pm)
Re: [LAU] 200 lines kernel patch, Niels Mayer, (Wed Nov 24, 6:55 am)
Re: [LAU] 200 lines kernel patch, Philipp Überbacher, (Wed Nov 24, 9:20 am)
Re: [LAU] 200 lines kernel patch, Paul Davis, (Sat Nov 20, 7:01 pm)
Re: [LAU] 200 lines kernel patch, david, (Sat Nov 20, 6:57 pm)
Re: [LAU] 200 lines kernel patch, Philipp Überbacher, (Sun Nov 21, 10:15 am)
Re: [LAU] 200 lines kernel patch, david, (Mon Nov 22, 3:54 am)