linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 0/8] Additional kmsg devices

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20160227115415.GA3965@htj.duckdns.org>
Date:	Sat, 27 Feb 2016 06:54:15 -0500
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc:	Kazimierz Krosman <k.krosman@...sung.com>,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, peter@...leysoftware.com,
	vvs@...tuozzo.com, corbet@....net, arnd@...db.de,
	gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, daniel@...que.org,
	kay.sievers@...y.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
	k.lewandowsk@...sung.com, m.niesluchow@...sung.com,
	richard.weinberger@...il.com, b.zolnierkie@...sung.com,
	luto@...capital.net, knhoon.baik@...sung.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/8] Additional kmsg devices

Hello,

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 03:47:18PM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > Could you explain in more detail what did you mean by IPC problems?
> 
> I guess that the idea was to make IPC more effective in general.
> You definitely could not move all functionality that needs IPC
> into the kernel.

1. There are multiple ways to do IPC and I don't think what was
   implemented as the comparison is optimal.

2. If that were optimal, we have an a lot larger general IPC problem
   than logging.  We can't possibly implement custom solution for each
   specific IPC use case in kernel.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun