[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m1sl6s6sj6.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2007 20:18:53 -0600
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / µÈÆ£±ÑÌÀ
<yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
devel@...nvz.org, adobriyan@...ru
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] sysctl: Error on bad sysctl tables
YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / µÈÆ£±ÑÌÀ <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org> writes:
> Hello.
>
> In article <m1hcn8a2rq.fsf_-_@...ederm.dsl.xmission.com> (at Thu, 09 Aug 2007
> 14:09:29 -0600), ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman) says:
>
>> After going through the kernels sysctl tables several times it has
>> become clear that code review and testing is just not effective in
>> prevent problematic sysctl tables from being used in the stable
>> kernel. I certainly can't seem to fix the problems as fast as
>> they are introduced.
> :
>> The biggest part of the code is the table of valid binary sysctl
>> entries, but since we have frozen our set of binary sysctls this table
>> should not need to change, and it makes it much easier to detect
>> when someone unintentionally adds a new binary sysctl value.
>
> I don't think everyone needs to have this code, so
> it is better to make it configurable via
> CONFIG_SYSCTL_DEBUG or something..., ...no?
I guess the other thing is. Except for code size it doesn't matter.
As register_sysctl_table gets called very rarely.
Eric
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists