From owner-freebsd-testing@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 12 02:53:44 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-testing@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5D065D49; Fri, 12 Jun 2015 02:53:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from crodr001@gmail.com) Received: from mail-yk0-x230.google.com (mail-yk0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1836E1F7C; Fri, 12 Jun 2015 02:53:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from crodr001@gmail.com) Received: by ykfw62 with SMTP id w62so4108252ykf.2; Thu, 11 Jun 2015 19:53:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=o/MPxr4pOoa8KuRlkTTHr1R4Y+2xKNXUKM4S3zjM6MM=; b=Zfkglwe8JOvtPmM6ZWtrkxRwwzdBAbSv5vcqeM11s4LUtij8skRvjTbO5xx1OBQfM+ YTU13zXF2HsAF25/kvezVEdz4vpKJz0JHFJsMgLn4mf1rThM9x5SMC3qq6LVLq+39O+I OsLG78MEpg9XtlfWuAt8WIas9g9LDFaB18pFj8liEEk6ZfMRFj+v1AcgZZNtX5Y7Q66O +6phYUvvl3mFpix+vItw8E1BHfVwAJCljEWlPoYvyBe8T4J9+JJN/cPhi4dEMA7ghnzg 5zwI9YY0273j8htZMod8McmlS0I2F2vyFoUBxhfEh/E1s+WhTALK75IAXdOdZtVr3qy6 jTBw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.170.52.211 with SMTP id 202mr15896671yku.86.1434077623136; Thu, 11 Jun 2015 19:53:43 -0700 (PDT) Sender: crodr001@gmail.com Received: by 10.13.233.70 with HTTP; Thu, 11 Jun 2015 19:53:43 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20150610224654.GM86224@funkthat.com> <5E0E3EAE-F184-478F-B2A0-D3FAB71ADB20@gmail.com> <3FE09AEA-A7C9-4406-83D7-541C823BB416@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 19:53:43 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: rm9KkjEH3N4cvhVmyAX8CIBL2RI Message-ID: Subject: Re: compiling parts of kernel in userland From: Craig Rodrigues To: "K. Macy" Cc: "freebsd-testing@freebsd.org" , arch@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.20 X-BeenThere: freebsd-testing@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Testing on FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 02:53:44 -0000 On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 12:10 AM, K. Macy wrote: > > It's a horrible unmaintainable steaming pile. There are of course no > objective metrics for such a statement without my wasting hours to go back > and look through it to come up with a comprehensive explanation. So I > imagine you'll want to debate this endlessly. > No, I'm not interested in debating endlessly. However, if you had some rough data points as to the downsides of rump kernels, it would be very useful for others to know what the problems are. You have a lot of knowledge, so it is nice to share your experiences with others. I've read the whitepapers on rump kernels, and seen some of the presentations on it. On the surface, the NetBSD developers who have worked on rump seem like reasonable and smart folks who put a lot of hard work into their project. If I didn't know any better, I would say their stuff is good. If rump is hard to compile on FreeBSD, that is one valid point. If you have other points besides, "it's a steaming pile", it would be nice to hear your thoughts. Otherwise it sounds like "not invented in FreeBSD, so it sucks". I recently asked a similar question about xhyve (bhyve for OS X), and got a simple succinct answer: https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-virtualization/2015-June/003624.html That's really all that is needed. If it will take hours to gather that info, then I agree, that is a waste of your time. I'd rather see you contribute stuff to FreeBSD, possibly using this Github pull requests using this workflow: https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2015-April/055551.html :) -- Craig -- Craig