linux-kernel - Re: Fwd: Question about kernel interfaces

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: <37103.1420812234@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Date:	Fri, 09 Jan 2015 09:03:54 -0500
From:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To:	Siddhartha De <siddhartha.de87@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	kernelnewbies@...nelnewbies.org
Subject: Re: Fwd: Question about kernel interfaces

On Fri, 09 Jan 2015 18:00:07 +0530, Siddhartha De said:

> In what timeframe should we migrate to "pure" sysfs and drop using
> any ioctls (if a sysfs interface exists)?

Pretty much the answer is "you don't", for the wsame reason that there's still
a lot of non-process stuff in /proc - there's no good way to clean up /pron up /
 proc or get rid of ioctl()'s without breaking userspace.

And some ioctl's you can't get rid of because they're part of official
standards (for instance, all to TIO_FOO stuff for controlling a terminal are
part of POSIX - removing them would break code that used to be portable...

Or to put it differently - ioctl() virst appeared in Unix Version 7 in 1979.
>From that, calculate how long it will take to get rid of.

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped