linux-kernel - Re: [patch 05/11] syslets: core code

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]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0702141308240.7796@alien.or.mcafeemobile.com>
Date:	Wed, 14 Feb 2007 13:09:38 -0800 (PST)
From:	Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@....com.au>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>,
	Zach Brown <zach.brown@...cle.com>,
	Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@...ck.org>,
	Suparna Bhattacharya <suparna@...ibm.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [patch 05/11] syslets: core code

On Wed, 14 Feb 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> 
> 
> On Tue, 13 Feb 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > the core syslet / async system calls infrastructure code.
> 
> Ok, having now looked at it more, I can say:
> 
>  - I hate it.
> 
> I dislike it intensely, because it's so _close_ to being usable. But the 
> programming interface looks absolutely horrid for any "casual" use, and 
> while the loops etc look like fun, I think they are likely to be less than 
> useful in practice. Yeah, you can do the "setup and teardown" just once, 
> but it ends up being "once per user", and it ends up being a lot of stuff 
> to do for somebody who wants to just do some simple async stuff.
> 
> And the whole "lock things down in memory" approach is bad. It's doing 
> expensive things like mlock(), making the overhead for _single_ system 
> calls much more expensive. Since I don't actually believe that the 
> non-single case is even all that interesting, I really don't like it.
> 
> I think it's clever and potentially useful to allow user mode to see the 
> data structures (and even allow user mode to *modify* them) while the 
> async thing is running, but it really seems to be a case of excessive 
> cleverness.

Ok, that makes the wierdo-count up to two :) I agree with you that the 
chained API can be improved at least.



- Davide


-
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/