linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 49/50] mars: generic pre-patch for mars

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:	Wed, 02 Jul 2014 16:36:42 +0200
From:	Thomas Schöbel-Theuer <tst@...d1.de>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC:	Thomas Schoebel-Theuer <tst@...oebel-theuer.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 49/50] mars: generic pre-patch for mars

> Using syscalls or syscall-like functionality from kernel code
> generally is a bad idea. Every single use needs a clear rationale in
> the patch description. Which do not seem to exist at all for the
> series, so in it's current form it'll go straight to the trash bin anyway.

Thanks, Christoph, for the explanation. I have been so long away from
the community that I don't remember all conventions / preferences any more.

Please, could you kindly advise me in the following dilemma:

Now there exists a vfs_rmdir() which I would gladly prefer in order to
avoid EXPORT_SYMBOL(sys_rmdir).

However, I probably would have to "borrow" large parts of the
sys_rmdir() implementation from fs/namei.c (the only real difference
appears to me that the pathname is not in userspace).

So, what is worse: copying relatively large pieces of code, or using
sys_rmdir()?

Thanks,

Thomas

--
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/