linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/17] [RFC] AFS: Implement OpenAFS pioctls(version)s

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]

Date:	Wed, 17 Jun 2009 00:11:57 +0100
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:	dhowells@...hat.com, torvalds@...l.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/17] [RFC] AFS: Implement OpenAFS pioctls(version)s

> Whilst I might wish to ultimately replace the OpenAFS userspace utilities with
> my own set, that's no small piece of work, and so a handy halfway stage is a
> mixed environment as outlined above.
> 
> Furthermore, the ability to use the OpenAFS userspace utilities unmodified
> with my kernel module, and, indeed vice-versa, makes testing much easier.

But if we add an ABI we end up stuck with it and this one is really
really rather ugly.

Can you not put pioctl() into a C library linked with the openafs
utilities that generates more sensible interface calls ? I mean you have
to produce the pioctl() syscall wrapper anyway so why not make "pioctl" a
user space compat library ?

Alan
--
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/