linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] kdbus for 4.1-rc1

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:	Wed, 15 Apr 2015 10:54:41 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
To:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
cc:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Tom Gundersen <teg@...m.no>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Daniel Mack <daniel@...que.org>,
	David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@...il.com>,
	Djalal Harouni <tixxdz@...ndz.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] kdbus for 4.1-rc1

On Wed, 15 Apr 2015, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:

> If you have a technical reason for why this code shouldn't be merged, 
> great, please let me know and we can work to address that.  Andy and Al 
> have spent time reviewing and giving us comments, and that's wonderful 
> and valuable and is why I treat their comments seriously.  If you are 
> interested in the code, please review it, otherwise I don't see what 
> this adds to the conversation at all, do you?

You've actually touched another issue I see here, and that is -- the code 
is complex like crazy.

I've spent big part of past two days trying to get my head around it, but 
I am still far away from getting at least the 1000 miles overview of how 
exactly the message passing is designed.

I understand that the primary reason for this complexity is probably the 
dbus protocol specification itself.

But the problem really is that I don't think you've received even a single 
Reviewed-by: from someone who hasn't been directly involved in developing 
the code, right?

For something that's potentially such a core mechanism as a completely 
new, massively-adopted IPC, this does send a warning singal.

Thanks,

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
--
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/