linux-kernel - Re: An idea .... with code

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: <20080826104454.GA13455@x200.localdomain>
Date:	Tue, 26 Aug 2008 14:44:54 +0400
From:	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:	jassi_singh_brar@...oo.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: An idea .... with code

On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 10:24:30AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> jassi brar <jassi_singh_brar@...oo.com> writes:
> 
> >   Lately a question has been bugging me: Why do we keep complicated(specific ioctls to set up and set free) 
> 
> Can you please expand a bit why you think losetup is that complicated
> and what the problem is with it?
> 
> AFAIK you're essentially just moving a minimal version of losetup
> (with missing features like no offsets etc.) into the kernel and
> frankly I fail to see the beauty in that. Or rather if you start with
> losetup, why stop at mount, modprobe, ifconfig, mkfs, fsck, ls[1], ...?
> 
> For me it seems more that most of the file system based command
> interfaces (/proc/mtrr comes to mind) are quite hard to use

Name four.

> and I prefer a proper command line tool with a manpage and --help
> and a real parser any day.

Go write mtrrctl(1) and a manpage. You'll need it in case of
ioctl-based interface anyway.

--
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/