linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] utrace core

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: <20080903184613.GD16175@infradead.org>
Date:	Wed, 3 Sep 2008 14:46:13 -0400
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>
Cc:	Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@...e.cz>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] utrace core

On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 11:08:54AM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > Why does it depend on MODULES? 
> 
> Because otherwise it's not adding anything new anyone can use.

It doesn't add anything new to use either way

> > Does this mean that when ptrace is switched to using the utrace engines,
> > non-modular kernels will have to lack ptrace(2)?
> 
> No.  If that were done, then it would be:
> 	depends on MODULE || PTRACE
> or suchlike.
> 
> > Is there anything in the code that actually breaks without
> > CONFIG_MODULES?
> 
> No.

In which case you should just remove this bogus (non-)dependency.
--
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/