linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 12/23] netpoll: Introduce netpoll

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:	Tue, 9 Nov 2010 09:24:33 -0800
From:	Mike Waychison <mikew@...gle.com>
To:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Cc:	"Am??rico Wang" <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
	simon.kagstrom@...insight.net, davem@...emloft.net,
	nhorman@...driver.com, Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
	adurbin@...gle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	chavey@...gle.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-api@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 12/23] netpoll: Introduce netpoll_target configs

On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 6:20 AM, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 05:06:45PM +0800, Am??rico Wang wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 12:34:24AM -0800, Mike Waychison wrote:
>> >On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 8:27 PM, Am??rico Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com> wrote:
>> >> On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 11:30:24AM +0800, Am??rico Wang wrote:
>> >>>
>> >> ....
>> >>>
>> >>>So, either we need to de-modulize configfs or replace configfs API
>> >>>with sysfs API. Personally, I prefer the former one, I don't think
>> >>>configfs should be a module as long as it can provide API's
>> >>>for other subsystems, like debugfs.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> To clarify, I meant "as long as the API it provides can be used by
>> >> other core subsystems".
>> >>
>> >
>> >Ya, I see the problem with it being a tristate.
>> >
>> >Why not just make netconsole support being compiled in force configfs
>> >to be compiled in?  Or does that just set bad precedent?
>>
>> That is what netconsole does now, and this is fine, since netconsole is
>> a module too, however, after you move that code into netpoll, then netpoll
>> will have a dependence on it, we will have problems.
>>
>> I think we can let NETPOLL_TARGET depend on CONFIGFS_FS=y, but I still
>> see no reason why CONFIGFS_FS should be a module.
>
> No, just have the NETPOLL_TARGET set CONFIG_FS to y, don't force the
> code to always be that way if the user isn't going to want that option.

Can you clarify what you mean by "that way" here?

Presumably, only NETPOLL_TARGET_DYNAMIC needs CONFIGFS_FS=y ?

Maybe none of this matters:  NETPOLL_TARGET itself *can* be a module,
as it doesn't do anything more than stack a target management layer on
top of the existing netpoll code.  Nothing in this patchset actually
changes anything within netpoll itself.

Mike Waychison
--
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/