Um?earlz wrote:no, I mean "out of the kernel" as in near native speed IPC going from ring 0->0. (my framework doesn't know about userspace)
Can you explain how that is different to a kernel module?
Cheers,
Brendan
Um?earlz wrote:no, I mean "out of the kernel" as in near native speed IPC going from ring 0->0. (my framework doesn't know about userspace)
well I suppose I confused myself on terminology.. but I don't intend for the modules to have direct access to kernel symbols..Brendan wrote:Hi,
Um?earlz wrote:no, I mean "out of the kernel" as in near native speed IPC going from ring 0->0. (my framework doesn't know about userspace)
Can you explain how that is different to a kernel module?
Cheers,
Brendan
How do you prevent that if it's running in ring 0?earlz wrote: well I suppose I confused myself on terminology.. but I don't intend for the modules to have direct access to kernel symbols..
I don't prevent it.. but I also don't support itm35 wrote:How do you prevent that if it's running in ring 0?earlz wrote: well I suppose I confused myself on terminology.. but I don't intend for the modules to have direct access to kernel symbols..
But it's harder to implement (especially efficiently), there's always at least a bit of latency due to context switching, and it really doesn't help in 99.99% of circumstances,berkus wrote:Take a look at Pebble, it is certainly possible to do this rather efficiently.Brendan wrote: However, IMHO there are some things that never make sense (e.g. shifting the scheduler out of the kernel). In these cases you get the disadvantages (worse efficiency caused by slower interfaces) but you don't get any advantages (you're still screwed if it crashes).