netdev - Re: [RFC] bonding driver terminology change proposal

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, 14 Jul 2020 00:00:16 +0200
From:   Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>
To:     netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Jarod Wilson <jarod@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] bonding driver terminology change proposal

On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 02:51:39PM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> To start out with, I'd like to attempt to eliminate as much of the use
> of master and slave in the bonding driver as possible. For the most
> part, I think this can be done without breaking UAPI, but may require
> changes to anything accessing bond info via proc or sysfs.

Could we, please, avoid breaking existing userspace tools and scripts?
Massive code churn is one thing and we could certainly bite the bullet
and live with it (even if I'm still not convinced it would be as great
idea as some present it) but trading theoretical offense for real and
palpable harm to existing users is something completely different.

Or is "don't break userspace" no longer the "first commandment" of linux
kernel development?

Michal Kubecek