linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 58/59] sysctl: Reimplement the sysctl proc support

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]

Message-ID: <20070314134652.GC13486@elte.hu>
Date:	Wed, 14 Mar 2007 14:46:52 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc:	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>,
	Alexander Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 58/59] sysctl: Reimplement the sysctl proc support


* Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com> wrote:

> However it has always been a bug for anything under /proc/sys to not 
> be a sysctl. It's not subtle breakage but subtle enforcement of the 
> existing rules.

it wasnt really a bug but an uncleanliness - but yeah. The way i used it 
is pretty much equivalent to a CTL_UNNUMBERED entry.

> [...]  It may be worth adding a test to create_proc_entry that says 
> "you silly person you need to use sysctls to create an entry under 
> /proc/sys"

yep, agreed - without the "silly person" bit ;-) It was a whole lot 
simpler in code to just add in a simple proc entry than a full sysctl 
table that i used for nothing. (because the sysctl wasnt really 
syscall-settable)

	Ingo
-
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/