|
|
Log in / Subscribe / Register

Sigh. NIH continues.

Sigh. NIH continues.

Posted Feb 26, 2025 5:24 UTC (Wed) by tullmann (subscriber, #20149)
In reply to: Sigh. NIH continues. by Cyberax
Parent article: A possible path for cancelable BPF programs

The original BPF paper is from 1992, so I don't think this is a case of NIH.

I do think the idea of isolating untrusted code so you can cleanly and efficiently terminate it is ... what user mode was originally designed for. So there is definitely a lot of prior art nearby in the kernel ....


to post comments

Sigh. NIH continues.

Posted Feb 26, 2025 20:27 UTC (Wed) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link]

Classic BPF is ancient. The new eBPF with all the bells and whistles started taking shape around 2016. At some point, they should have done a bit of self-reflection and looked at the state of the art around them.

But yeah, all other technologies have just one fatal flaw.


Copyright © 2026, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds