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
| ||
|
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists