linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 07/18] nitro_enclaves: Init misc device providing the ioctl interface

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 01 Jun 2020 13:04:19 +1000
From:   Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Alexander Graf <graf@...zon.de>
Cc:     Andra Paraschiv <andraprs@...zon.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Anthony Liguori <aliguori@...zon.com>,
        Colm MacCarthaigh <colmmacc@...zon.com>,
        Bjoern Doebel <doebel@...zon.de>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>,
        Frank van der Linden <fllinden@...zon.com>,
        Martin Pohlack <mpohlack@...zon.de>,
        Matt Wilson <msw@...zon.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Balbir Singh <sblbir@...zon.com>,
        Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com>,
        Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>,
        Stewart Smith <trawets@...zon.com>,
        Uwe Dannowski <uwed@...zon.de>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        ne-devel-upstream@...zon.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 07/18] nitro_enclaves: Init misc device providing the
 ioctl interface

On Thu, 2020-05-28 at 15:12 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> So at runtime, after all is booted and up and going, you just ripped
> cores out from under someone's feet?  :)
> 
> And the code really handles writing to that value while the module is
> already loaded and up and running?  At a quick glance, it didn't seem
> like it would handle that very well as it only is checked at ne_init()
> time.
> 
> Or am I missing something?
> 
> Anyway, yes, if you can dynamically do this at runtime, that's great,
> but it feels ackward to me to rely on one configuration thing as a
> module parameter, and everything else through the ioctl interface.
> Unification would seem to be a good thing, right?

I personally still prefer a sysfs file :) I really don't like module
parameters as a way to do such things.

Cheers,
Ben.