linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] Don't use linux/version.h anymore to indicate a per-driver version - Was: Re: [PATCH 03/37] Remove unneeded version.h includes from include/

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: <4E05073A.3030209@infradead.org>
Date:	Fri, 24 Jun 2011 18:52:58 -0300
From:	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...radead.org>
To:	Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
CC:	Devin Heitmueller <dheitmueller@...nellabs.com>,
	Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl>,
	Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, trivial@...nel.org,
	linux-media@...r.kernel.org, ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org,
	Sage Weil <sage@...dream.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Don't use linux/version.h anymore to indicate a per-driver
 version - Was: Re: [PATCH 03/37] Remove unneeded version.h includes from
 include/

Em 24-06-2011 18:10, Stefan Richter escreveu:
> On Jun 24 Devin Heitmueller wrote:
>> Really, this is all about applications being able to jam a hack into
>> their code that translates to "don't call this ioctl() with some
>> particular argument if it's driver W less than version X, because the
>> driver had a bug that is likely to panic the guy's PC".  Sure, it's a
>> crummy solution, but at this point it's the best that we have got.
> 
> The second best.  The best that we have got is that the user runs a fixed
> kernel.
> 
> Anyway; if this is the only purpose that this interface version¹ serves,
> then Mauro's subsystem-centralized solution has the benefit that it
> eliminates mistakes due to oversight by individual driver authors.
> Especially because the kind of implementation behavior changes that are
> tracked by this type of version datum are sometimes just discovered or
> documented in hindsight.  On the other hand, Mauro's solution is redundant
> to the uname(2) syscall.

Yes. That's why my initial proposal were to add some value to it by not associating
it with the kernel version, but with a number that will be incremented only if
the V4L2 API changes.

> 
> ¹) Yes, it is still an ABI version, nothing less.  With all its backwards
> and forwards compatibility ramifications.

--
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/