[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <79b6bdbc-890a-5a51-7fa1-aec57889046a@opersys.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2019 16:52:18 -0400
From: Karim Yaghmour <karim.yaghmour@...rsys.com>
To: Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, joel@...lfernandes.org
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
qais.yousef@....com, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
linux@...ojrajarao.com, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
ast@...nel.org, atishp04@...il.com, dancol@...gle.com,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Guenter Roeck <groeck@...omium.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, kernel-team@...roid.com,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
linux-trace-devel@...r.kernel.org,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
mhiramat@...nel.org, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, yhs@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/3] Provide in-kernel headers to make extending kernel
easier
Hi Olof,
On 4/8/19 12:29 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> Sorry to be late at the party with this kind of feedback, but I find
> the whole ".tar.gz in procfs" to be an awkward solution, especially if
> there's expected to be userspace tooling that depends on this
> long-term.
>
> Wouldn't it be more convenient to provide it in a standardized format
> such that you won't have to take an additional step, and always have
> it in a known location?
>
> Something like:
>
> - Pseudo-filesystem, that can just be mounted under
> /sys/kernel/headers or something (similar to debugfs or
> /proc/device-tree).
> - Exporting something like a squashfs image instead, allowing
> loopback mounting of it (or by providing a pseudo-/dev entry for it),
> again allowing direct export of the contents and avoiding the
> extracted directory from being out of sync with currently running
> kernel.
>
> Having to copy and extract the tarball is the most awkward step, IMHO.
> I also find the waste of kernel memory for it to be an issue, but
> given that it can be built as a module I guess that's the obvious
> solution for those who care about memory consumption.
One of the things I pointed out earlier in the thread is that
/proc/config.gz has already set a precedent as to the interface for this
sort of artifact. It's a plain compressed file and it's directly
accessible from toplevel /proc. From a consistency perspective there's
an idiomatic angle to some sort of "/proc/kheaders.gz".
In some offline discussions I was also told that squashfs (I'm no expert
of it) required special user-space tools and had some security issues.
Cheers,
--
Karim Yaghmour
CEO - Opersys inc. / www.opersys.com
http://twitter.com/karimyaghmour
Powered by blists - more mailing lists