gem5Linux is *way* better than overloading SELinux IMO On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 9:14 AM Jason Lowe-Power <[email protected]> wrote:
> One option is gem5Linux since it is kind of "gem5 flavored" Linux. > > SELinux isn't that bad. I doubt too many people will think that gem5 > is implementing a secure linux ;). > > Other options: > EmuLinux (surprisingly doesn't return anything on Google except qemu) > SEModeLinux > SEOnlyLinux > > After thinking about it for a few minutes, I don't think the name is > *too* important. I'd be ok with anything :) > > Jason > > On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 5:55 PM Gabe Black <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi folks. I would like to pull the operating system level concepts (like > > syscall dispatch) out of the process objects and into an actual operating > > system object which collects and manages the process objects. It's main > > duties could be coordinating loading processes from object files, handing > > out PIDs, and dispatching system calls. > > > > The name for this has traditionally been SE for syscall emulation mode, > but > > SELinux is already an unrelated thing and this could be confusing for > > people. Does anybody have a better suggestion? > > > > Note that there are many details to figure out still so I'm not moving > > forward with this right now, I'm just brainstorming how this might all > fit > > together. > > > > Gabe > > _______________________________________________ > > gem5-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev > _______________________________________________ > gem5-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev -- Vince Harron | Engineering Manager | [email protected] | 858-442-0868 _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
