[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080208135816.f242a846.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 13:58:16 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
Cc: hs4233@...l.mn-solutions.de, michael-lists@...e-electrons.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sysctl: allow embedded targets to disable
sysctl_check.c
On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 03:36:41 -0700
ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman) wrote:
> Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> writes:
>
> > On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 14:38:58 +0100 Holger Schurig <hs4233@...l.mn-solutions.de>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Disable sysctl_check.c for embedded targets. This saves about about 11 kB
> >> in .text and another 11 kB in .data on a PXA255 embedded platform.
> >>
> >
> > Nice improvement. But iirc sysctl_check was overtly a temporary thing.
> > Eric, was that the intention?
>
> Well so far sysctl_check has been a remarkably effective little piece of code
> in catching a great many long over looked bugs.
>
> I do agree that the static tables are big. My current inclination is to modify
> sys_sysctl so that it does a look up in the binary tables to find the ascii
> names and then sys_sysctl can lookup the information in the ascii tables.
>
> If we do that we can completely remove ctl_name form the external sysctl data
> structures, which should save us quite a bit of space and make it absolutely
> impossible to add a new binary name. And with the current ability to compile
> out sys_sysctl the embedded folks would get their space savings.
>
> I believe the only tricky bit is there are a few places in the network code
> where we need to translate from ifindex to interface name. Otherwise
> the mapping is fixed.
>
> No that isn't quite right. Getting the binary to ascii translation for the
> values is also a bit tricky.
>
> As for the rest of the checks I don't know if they are that big. If they
> are then an option to compile them out on embedded platforms where you
> know what you are doing makes sense. At the same time sysctl has been so
> badly abused in the past, and so very many bugs have been over looked
> that I am extremely reluctant to disable simple sanity checks at
> registration time.
>
> If we can remove the need for sysctl users to implement the binary
> interface many of those checks go completely away as the reason for their
> existence would be gone.
>
> I have seen to many absolutely horrible things in the usage of the sysctl
> tables to be happy with an option that removes the sanity checks at this
> point, although the patch likely makes sense from a code size perspective.
>
> Let's see if we can find a bit of time to make those big tables completely
> specific to sys_sysctl and kill ctl_name in the kernel. Long term that is
> a whole lot more maintainable, and smaller for everyone who can disable
> sys_sysctl.
mm... I'm inclined to merge the patch. It's a decent saving, and it
requires CONFIG_EMBEDDED which most people don't appear to set.
--
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