linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 12/23] netpoll: Introduce netpoll

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:	Tue, 9 Nov 2010 17:06:45 +0800
From:	Américo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To:	Mike Waychison <mikew@...gle.com>
Cc:	Américo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
	simon.kagstrom@...insight.net, davem@...emloft.net,
	nhorman@...driver.com, Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
	adurbin@...gle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	chavey@...gle.com, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 12/23] netpoll: Introduce netpoll_target configs

On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 12:34:24AM -0800, Mike Waychison wrote:
>On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 8:27 PM, Américo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 11:30:24AM +0800, Américo Wang wrote:
>>>
>> ....
>>>
>>>So, either we need to de-modulize configfs or replace configfs API
>>>with sysfs API. Personally, I prefer the former one, I don't think
>>>configfs should be a module as long as it can provide API's
>>>for other subsystems, like debugfs.
>>>
>>
>> To clarify, I meant "as long as the API it provides can be used by
>> other core subsystems".
>>
>
>Ya, I see the problem with it being a tristate.
>
>Why not just make netconsole support being compiled in force configfs
>to be compiled in?  Or does that just set bad precedent?

That is what netconsole does now, and this is fine, since netconsole is
a module too, however, after you move that code into netpoll, then netpoll
will have a dependence on it, we will have problems.

I think we can let NETPOLL_TARGET depend on CONFIGFS_FS=y, but I still
see no reason why CONFIGFS_FS should be a module.

--
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/