netdev - RE: [PATCH net-next 0/5] SCTP updates

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6D1726F0E9@AcuExch.aculab.com>
Date:	Wed, 9 Jul 2014 11:12:06 +0000
From:	David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:	'Neil Horman' <nhorman@...driver.com>,
	Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>
CC:	"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"geirola@...il.com" <geirola@...il.com>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org" <linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next 0/5] SCTP updates

From: Neil Horman
> > In how many years do you plan a removal ... I think we're stuck with uapi
> > basically forever as we don't want to break old binaries, no? ;/
> >
> I thought we could remove things on a schedule if we followed the deprecation
> process, but that may just be for sysfs.  Regardless, it would still be nice to
> inform people they are using an older api.

The issue here is that it is an application API, not a system programming one.
I'd guess that most sysfs stuff is only used by programs that are released
as part of a Linux distribution - and thus code that is likely to be
release with a matching kernel.

These sccp structures are much more likely to be used by 'proper' 3rd party
applications, targeted at multiple kernel versions - possibly in binary form.
We compile applications on the oldest linux version we think our customers
are using - otherwise we'd have to release multiple copies.

So I don't think they can be deprecated (with warnings from the kernel) for
a long time, perhaps 5 or 10 years!

The first stage would be (somehow) to generate warnings when applications
are compiled. Only when that has been in place for some time would it
make sense to generate kernel warnings.

		David

--
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