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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 10:41:09 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> To: Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net> Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>, Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>, Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@....com>, Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>, Manoj Rao <linux@...ojrajarao.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, atish patra <atishp04@...il.com>, Daniel Colascione <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>, Karim Yaghmour <karim.yaghmour@...rsys.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Android Kernel Team <kernel-team@...roid.com>, "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>, linux-trace-devel@...r.kernel.org, Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/3] Provide in-kernel headers to make extending kernel easier On Sun, 14 Apr 2019 12:38:34 -0700 Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net> wrote: > >From my perspective, this is where we're at: > > This patch seems to have been met with a lot of responses in the tone > of "this is not an appealing solution". Meanwhile, some of the > suggested alternative solutions have not worked out, and we are now at > a point where there's less interest in exploring alternatives and > arguments to merge as-is with only minor adjustments. Another consideration to make is difficulty of support. Having a tarball compressed headers may not be an appealing solution, but it isn't one that would be too much of an issue to support. Having a better interface would be difficult to get right, and if you get it wrong, you are now stuck with supporting something that may become a big pain to do so in the future. > I'd be a *lot* less hesitant if this went into debugfs or another > location than /proc, which is one of the most regression-sensitive > interfaces we have in the kernel. > I agree with this assessment. We shouldn't use config.gz as precedence for this solution. config.gz should have been in debugfs to begin with, but I don't believe debugfs was around when config.gz was introduced. (Don't have time to look into the history of the two). -- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists