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]
Date:	Tue, 12 Jan 2016 15:54:40 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	stephen@...workplumber.org
Cc:	jhs@...atatu.com, lkundrak@...sk, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] ifb: make device count build-time configurable

From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 10:44:37 -0800

> On Tue, 12 Jan 2016 07:55:22 -0500
> Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 16-01-12 06:56 AM, Lubomir Rintel wrote:
>> > The devices can be created at run-time for quite some time already and the
>> > load-time device creation collides with attempts to create the device of
>> > the same name:
>> >
>> >    # rmmod ifb
>> >    # ip link add ifb0 type ifb
>> >    RTNETLINK answers: File exists
>> >
>> > This is pretty much the same situation as was with the block loop devices
>> > which was solved by adding a build-time configuration that the
>> > distributions could use as they deem fit while keeping the default for
>> > compatibility.
>> >
>> > Let's do that here as well.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Lubomir Rintel <lkundrak@...sk>
>> 
>> I guess module options are frowned upon. so:
> 
> I would prefer that this were done with a module parameter, the same as dummy.
> Only developers build their own configured kernels. Having the value set later
> at module load time is preferable.

I like this even less, it means tools behave significantly differently
based upon what module options were passed to the kernel.

Module options really should not change kernel behavior like this..

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ