[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZGKU5vP8Anmfeen0@bombadil.infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2023 13:24:06 -0700
From: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
To: Joel Granados <j.granados@...sung.com>
Cc: Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>,
Iurii Zaikin <yzaikin@...gle.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] sysctl: Remove register_sysctl_table from parport
On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 09:14:40AM +0200, Joel Granados wrote:
> This is part of the general push to deprecate register_sysctl_paths and
> register_sysctl_table. Parport driver uses the "CHILD" pointer
> in the ctl_table structure to create its directory structure. We move to
> the newer register_sysctl call and remove the pointer madness.
Nice! Thanks for doing this and unwinding the sysctl use case which
takes the cake for the obfuscation use case of sysctls.
> I have separated the parport into 5 patches to clarify the different
> changes needed for the 3 calls to register_sysctl_paths. I can squash
> them together if need be.
I think it makes sense to keep them that way.
> We no longer export the register_sysctl_table call as parport was the
> last user from outside proc_sysctl.c. Also modified documentation slightly
> so register_sysctl_table is no longer mentioned.
We can go further, but I'll explain in patch review on the patches.
> I'm waiting on the 0-day tests results.
Nice!
Luis
Powered by blists - more mailing lists