linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] sysctl: Allow /proc/sys without sys

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <44B7FA09.5070803@zytor.com>
Date:	Fri, 14 Jul 2006 13:09:45 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...l.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sysctl: Allow /proc/sys without sys_sysctl

Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 09:58:29PM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>> On Wed, 2006-07-12 at 11:24 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
>>> What is the motivation behind killing the sys_sysctl call anyway?
>>> Sure its more ugly esthetically but it works.
>> it "works" but the thing is that the number space is NOT stable, and as
>> such it's a really bad ABI
> 
> To be fair, the older, "base" numbers are actually stable, such as
> what glibc is depending on, have in practice been quite stable.  It's
> only the newer fields that tend to be unstable.
> 
> But that means we can afford to do an orderly migration away from it;
> it's not something that has to be urgently done within a few weeks or
> even a few months.
> 

Another alternative would be to publish a limited set of sysctl numbers 
that will be maintained forever.

	-hpa
-
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/