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:	Mon, 26 Nov 2007 14:18:25 -0800
From:	Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
To:	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>, 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.

 > Agreed. On first glance, I was intrigued but:
 > 
 > 1) Why is everyone so concerned that export symbol space is large?
 > 	- does it cost cpu or running memory?
 > 	- does it cause bugs?
 > 	- or are you just worried about "evil modules"?
 > 
 > 2) These aren't real namespaces
 > 	- all global names still have to be unique
 > 	- still have to handle the "non-modular build" namespace conflicts
 > 	- there isn't a big problem with conflicting symbols today.

Perhaps changing the name from "namespace" to "interface" would help?
Then a module could have something like

MODULE_USE_INTERFACE(foo);

and I think that makes it clearer what the advantage of this is: it
marks symbols as being part of a certain interface, requires modules
that use that interface to declare that use explicitly, and allows
reviewers to say "Hey why is this code using the scsi interface when
it's a webcam driver?"

 - R.
-
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