linux-kernel - Re: pcmcia ioctl removal

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:	Tue, 01 May 2007 14:06:53 +0200
From:	Konstantin Münning <konstantin@...nning.com>
To:	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
CC:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>,
	linux-pcmcia@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...dspring.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: pcmcia ioctl removal

Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 12:12:36PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>> On May 1 2007 05:16, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>>> on the other hand, the features removal file contains the following:
>>>
>>> ...
>>> What:   PCMCIA control ioctl (needed for pcmcia-cs [cardmgr, cardctl])
>>> When:   November 2005
>>> ...
>>>
>>> in other words, the PCMCIA ioctl feature *has* been listed as obsolete
>>> for quite some time, and is already a *year and a half* overdue for
>>> removal.
>>>
>>> in short, it's annoying to take the position that stuff can't be
>>> deleted without warning, then turn around and be reluctant to remove
>>> stuff for which *more than ample warning* has already been given.
>>> doing that just makes a joke of the features removal file, and makes
>>> you wonder what its purpose is in the first place.
>>>
>>> a little consistency would be nice here, don't you think?
>> I think this could raise their attention...
>>
>> init/Makefile
>> obj-y += obsolete.o
>>
>> init/obsolete.c:
>> static __init int obsolete_init(void)
>> {
>> 	printk("\e[1;31m""
>>
>> The following stuff is gonna get removed \e[5;37m SOON: \e[0m
>> 	- cardmgr
>> 	- foobar
>> 	- bweebol
>>
>> ");
>> 	schedule_timeout(3 * HZ);
>> 	return;
>> }
>>
>> static __exit void obsolete_exit(void) {}
> 
> There's something I like here : the fact that all features are centralized
> and not hidden in the noise. Clearly we need some standard inside the kernel
> to manage obsolete code as well as we currently do by hand.
> 
> Willy

What about something like the tainted flag which status can be displayed
 easily? And even better when a list of the used obsolete features can
be displayed as well on request? This way you don't need to search the
logs. A standardized obsolete function like the one above could do all
the job.

Just my 2 cents.
-- 
Konstantin Münning
-
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/