linux-kernel - Re: Would an "information module" be useful?

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Sun, 22 Sep 2013 22:37:46 +0200
From:	Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To:	Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
CC:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Would an "information module" be useful?

Am 22.09.2013 22:30, schrieb Markus Elfring:
>> You can do all parsing in user space too.
> 
> Is it questionable when a custom prefix of a boot command-line parameter can not
> be mapped to a kernel module?

No.
In the systemd case we have to ensure that we never ever merge a module named "systemd".
It's that easy. :)

>> drivers/misc/ is a nice place do dump such things. :-)
> 
> Is an information sink module (with corresponding data type checks) still an
> "ordinary" driver?

We have all kinds of strange modules/drivers. Usually you don't have to think whether your
module is a "ordinary" driver or not...
See drivers/misc/dummy-irq.c.

Thanks,
//richard

--
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/