linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv6 0/7] system time changes notification

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: <1290085700.2270.7.camel@localhost>
Date:	Thu, 18 Nov 2010 15:08:20 +0200
From:	Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>
To:	Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>
Cc:	Alexander Shishkin <virtuoso@...nd.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Kyle Moffett <kyle@...fetthome.net>, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	John Stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>, Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>,
	Chris Friesen <chris.friesen@...band.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv6 0/7] system time changes notification

On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 12:42 -0800, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Nov 2010, Alexander Shishkin wrote:
> 
> > > But what you folks really want for this stuff is an extension to
> > > timerfd as you want to be able to poll, right?
> > > 
> > > So what about the following:
> > > 
> > > Add a new flag TDF_NOTIFY_CLOCK_WAS_SET to the timerfd flags. Now this
> > > flag adds the timer to a separate list, which gets woken up when the
> > > clock is set.
> > > 
> > > No new syscall, just a few lines of code in fs/timerfd.c and
> > > clock_was_set().
> > > 
> > > Thoughts ?
> > 
> > Something like this (sans ugliness)?
> 
> Oh, gosh, please.  This is interface-multiplexing-a-palooza.
> It should be decided if the feature makes sense, and then have proper 
> interface, instead of multiplexing unrelated insterfaces.
> This is a sort of system-event-report pattern.  What is wrong with using a 
> netlink-based transport for those kind of things?

Could you please explain in more details what is the problem?

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)

--
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/