linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Force UNIX domain sockets to be built in

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 31 Dec 2007 19:48:43 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	7eggert@....de
Cc:	viro@...IV.linux.org.uk, jengelh@...putergmbh.de, devzero@....de,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bunk@...nel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Force UNIX domain sockets to be built in

From: Bodo Eggert <7eggert@....de>
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2008 04:45:21 +0100 (CET)

> The big question is: Is there any non-embedded system where you have
> to aim for a small kernel image?

One some platforms, due to bootloader restrictions or whatever,
there are hard limits on how large the main kernel image can be.

On sparc64 for example the limit is around 6.5MB

But this "big question" isn't the important issue, in fact it's
tangental and has no bearing on the final decision we make
here.

Rather, choice is, and taking choice away is bad.  I may have a reason
to make AF_UNIX modular, I might not, but either way taking that
option away from me is not the right thing to do.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/