linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] constify tables in kernel/sysctl

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: <476B7DBB.76E4.0078.0@novell.com>
Date:	Fri, 21 Dec 2007 07:47:55 +0000
From:	"Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@...ell.com>
To:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc:	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] constify tables in kernel/sysctl_check.c

>>> Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com> 21.12.07 00:05 >>>
>"Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@...ell.com> writes:
>
>> Remains the question whether it is intended that many, perhaps even
>> large, tables are compiled in without ever having a chance to get used,
>> i.e. whether there shouldn't #ifdef CONFIG_xxx get added.
>
>
>The constification looks good.  The file should be compiled only when
>we have sysctl support.  We use those tables when we call 
>register_sysctl_table.  Which we do a lot.

I understand this. Nevertheless, the tables take 23k on 64-bits, and many
of them are unused when certain subsystems aren't being built (and some
are even architecture specific). The arlan tables are a particularly good
example, but the netfilter ones are pretty big and probably not always
used, too.

Jan

--
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/