Talk:Seccomp
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of the Linux WikiProject, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage of articles relating to Linux, and who are involved in developing and proposing standards for their content, presentation and other aspects.
If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
|
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. |
 |
This article has been automatically rated as Stub-Class because it uses a stub template.
|
I feel that the phrase "burdened with patents that aim to restrict the freedoms of grid computing service providers" is not NPOV. Yes, CPUshare has patents, but Andrea says that "the CPUShare project has simply no choice but to try to play best by the current rules of the economy in the hope to succeed." This suggests to me that it is an issue of preventing larger companies from squashing CPUshare by simply creating a much larger service that can easily beat it.
While the ethics of patenting this may be dubious, we should present both sides of the issue, and not put words in Andrea's mouth about the reason for the patents.
-- ThinkingInBinary 13:09, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
With the merging of this patch in the mainline kernel seccomp become a totally zero-overhead feature despite the tsc disable.
This further patch even reduces the fixed number of bytes that seccomp takes in the kernel .text:
So the most recent part of the seccomp article is now incorrect and outdated. And I refrain to comment on the CPUShare part because I've clear conflict of interest, so I'll wait the community to sort it out eventually.
Andrea
