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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2008 00:01:54 -0500 From: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu> To: Bodo Eggert <7eggert@....de> Cc: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, 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 On Tue, Jan 01, 2008 at 04:45:21AM +0100, Bodo Eggert wrote: > > udev-free != embedded. > > But UNIX=m == waste RAM and have an effectively b0rken system until the > module is loaded. Well, the system isn't necessarily totally broken. If you don't use udev, then system will be crippled, but not totally broken. Then again, besides udev, packages such as dbus, gdm, and acpid all use Unix Domain Sockets --- not to mention cups, avahi-daemon, bluez, emacsclient, and any X program when the DISPLAY is :0.0. The question is whether the size of the Unix domain sockets support is worth the complexity of yet another config option that we expose to the user. For the embedded world, OK, maybe they want to save 14k of non-swappable memory. But for the non-embedded world, given the 117k mandatory memory usage of sysfs, or the 124k memory usage of the core networking stack, never mind the 3 megabytes of memory used by objects in the kernel subdirectory, it's not clear that it's worth worrying over 14k of memory, especially when many Unix programs assume that Unix Domain Sockets are present. - Ted -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists