linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv10 1/3] rdmacg: Added rdma cgroup controller

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: <CAG53R5WBBUj6=B81Q-zEwL_xy3_yXUofJ6p921baqnqeVocDPQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 5 Apr 2016 05:39:21 -0700
From:	Parav Pandit <pandit.parav@...il.com>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, lizefan@...wei.com,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
	Liran Liss <liranl@...lanox.com>,
	"Hefty, Sean" <sean.hefty@...el.com>,
	Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>,
	Haggai Eran <haggaie@...lanox.com>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, james.l.morris@...cle.com,
	serge@...lyn.com, Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
	Matan Barak <matanb@...lanox.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv10 1/3] rdmacg: Added rdma cgroup controller

Hi Christoph,

On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 2:06 AM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 09:25:04PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> Is it actually customary to have rdma core module updated more
>> frequently separate from the kernel?  Out-of-tree modules being
>> updated separately happens quite a bit but this is an in-kernel
>> module, which usually is tightly coupled with the rest of the kernel.
>
> People do it for all the wrong reasons - OFED and organization of morons
> wants people to use their modules, which causes lots of harm.  Anything
> that makes this harder is a good thing.
>
I am not really trying to address OFED issues here. I am sure you
understand that if ib_core.ko kernel module is in-kernel module than,
for all the fixes/enhancements that goes to it would require people to
upgrade to newer kernel, instead of just modules upgrade. Such heavy
weight upgrade slows down the adoption which i am trying to avoid here
by placing knobs in right kernel module's hand.
Its like making ib_core.ko from module to in kernel component, if I
understand correctly nobody wants to do that.