linux-kernel - Re: Would an "information module" be useful?

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: <523F4A55.3090106@web.de>
Date:	Sun, 22 Sep 2013 21:51:49 +0200
From:	Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Would an "information module" be useful?

> Why can't you use /proc/cmdline?

Thanks for your suggestion.

> (see parse_proc_cmdline())

How do you think about reasons like the following?

1. I would prefer to avoid the repeated parsing of boot command-line parameters
because the reuse of the kernel infrastructure should be better here.

2. Documentation
   Module parameters can also be explained in the source files.
   http://tldp.org/LDP/lkmpg/2.6/html/x323.html

3. Is a corresponding check for specific data types "nice"?
   http://www.linux-magazin.de/Ausgaben/2004/05/Kern-Technik/%28offset%29/2

How are the chances to clarify this implementation detail: In which subdirectory
should a kernel module be stored if it will not manage any hardware?

Regards,
Markus

--
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/