netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC] [1/9] Core module symbol namespaces code and intro.

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 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:	Fri, 23 Nov 2007 11:25:11 +1100
From:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, sam@...nborg.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] [1/9] Core module symbol namespaces code and intro.

On Thursday 22 November 2007 22:05:45 Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 22, 2007 at 02:56:22PM +1100, Rusty Russell wrote:
> >     This is an interesting idea, thanks for the code!  My only question
> > is whether we can get most of this benefit by dropping the indirection of
> > namespaces and have something like "EXPORT_SYMBOL_TO(sym, modname)"?  It
> > doesn't work so well for exporting to a group of modules, but that seems
> > a reasonable line to draw anyway.
>
> I'd say exporting to a group of modules is the main use case.  E.g. in
> scsi there would be symbols exported to transport class modules only
> or lots of the vfs_ symbols would be exported only to stackable filesystems
> or nfsd.

That's my point.  If there's a whole class of modules which can use a symbol, 
why are we ruling out external modules?  If that's what you want, why not 
have a list of permitted modules compiled into the kernel and allow no 
others?

Cheers,
Rusty.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html