linux-kernel - Re: VT console need rewrite

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: <1290961207.13526.31.camel@cai.gentoo>
Date:	Mon, 29 Nov 2010 00:20:07 +0800
From:	Microcai <microcai@...oraproject.org>
To:	Lisa Milne <lisa@...net.com>
Cc:	"jonsmirl@...il.com" <jonsmirl@...il.com>,
	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-console@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: VT console need rewrite


> 
> Another possible model: split the current system in 2, so there's a
> bytestream handler, and a vt-legacy module. Then use the interface
> between bytestream/legacy as an interface for future vt-kernel and
> vt-user modules.

this may cause early printk stop working. 

> 
> This may make it possible to create an initial patch to do the split,
> then work on the new system independently of the current vt system.
> Hopefully reducing any problems with api/subsystem inconsistencies
> breaking existing code elsewhere, by giving it time to adapt.
> 
> This is guesswork on my part as I haven't actually looked at the code,
> so while it sounds good in theory, you'd have to check if it's actually
> doable.
> 

Sounds like a good idea. Who is in charge of VT system ? Seems no
one ....

--
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/