linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/8] proc: export more page flags in /proc/kpageflags

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:	Sat, 9 May 2009 20:58:57 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	fengguang.wu@...el.com, fweisbec@...il.com, rostedt@...dmis.org,
	a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, lizf@...fujitsu.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com,
	andi@...stfloor.org, mpm@...enic.com, adobriyan@...il.com,
	linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/8] proc: export more page flags in /proc/kpageflags

On Sat, 9 May 2009 12:44:09 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:

> 
> * Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 8 May 2009 13:47:42 +0200
> > Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > * Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Export all page flags faithfully in /proc/kpageflags.
> > > 
> > > Ongoing objection and NAK against extended haphazard exporting of 
> > > kernel internals via an ad-hoc ABI via ad-hoc, privatized 
> > > instrumentation that only helps the MM code and nothing else.
> > 
> > You're a year too late.  The pagemap interface is useful.
> 
> My NAK is against the extension of this mistake.
> 
> So is your answer to my NAK in essence:
> 
>  " We merged crappy MM instrumentation a short year ago, too bad.
>    And because it was so crappy to be in /proc we are now also
>    treating it as a hard ABI, not as a debugfs interface - for that 
>    single app that is using it. Furthermore, we are now going to 
>    make the API and ABI even more crappy via patches queued up in 
>    -mm, and we are ignoring NAKs. We are also going to make it even 
>    harder to have sane, generic instrumentation in the upstream 
>    kernel. Deal with it, this is our code and we can mess it up the 
>    way we wish to, it's none of your business."
> 
> right?
> 

If that was my answer, that is what I would have typed.

But I in fact typed something quite different.
--
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/