linux-kernel - Re: Question about dynamic minor number of misc device

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: <20200121154245.GB588670@kroah.com>
Date:   Tue, 21 Jan 2020 16:42:45 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@...il.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Question about dynamic minor number of misc device

On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 05:13:23PM -0500, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> > - FLASH_MINOR move and rename to avoid conflict
> > - change speakup to dynamic minors
> > - support for high dynamic minor numbers if you are really motivated
> >   (probably nobody needs these)
> 
> Are we sure that reassigning minor device number conflits isn't going
> to break systems?  Especially those on random, older, architectures
> they might not be using udev.

Note, I do not think udev has been in charge of creating /dev/ nodes for
well over 10 years now, that is up to devtmpfs.

thanks,

greg k-h