netdev - Re: [PATCH] bpf: move the bpf syscall sysctl table to its own module

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 23 Feb 2022 02:24:14 +0000
From:   "zhuyan (M)" <zhuyan34@...wei.com>
To:     Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
CC:     "ast@...nel.org" <ast@...nel.org>,
        "daniel@...earbox.net" <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        "andrii@...nel.org" <andrii@...nel.org>,
        "kafai@...com" <kafai@...com>,
        "songliubraving@...com" <songliubraving@...com>,
        "yhs@...com" <yhs@...com>,
        "john.fastabend@...il.com" <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        "kpsingh@...nel.org" <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
        "keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>,
        "yzaikin@...gle.com" <yzaikin@...gle.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "bpf@...r.kernel.org" <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Zengweilin <zengweilin@...wei.com>,
        "liucheng (G)" <liucheng32@...wei.com>,
        Nixiaoming <nixiaoming@...wei.com>,
        xiechengliang <xiechengliang1@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bpf: move the bpf syscall sysctl table to its own module

On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 09:42:00AM +0800, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 09:35:29AM +0800, Yan Zhu wrote:
> > Sysctl table is easier to read under its own module.
> 
> Hey Yan, thanks for you patch!
> 
> This does not explain how this is being to help with maitenance as otherwise this makes
> kernel/sysctl.c hard to maintain and we also tend to get many conflicts. It also does not
> explain how all the filesystem sysctls are not gone and that this is just the next step, 
> moving slowly the rest of the sysctls. Explaining this in the commit log will help patch
> review and subsystem maintainers understand the conext / logic behind the move.
> 
> I'd be more than happy to take this if bpf folks Ack. To avoid conflicts I can route this
> through sysctl-next which is put forward in particular to avoid conflicts across trees for
> this effort. Let me know.

Thank you for your reply. 

My patch is based on sysctl-next, sorry I forgot to identify it as a patch from the
sysctl-next branch. I will send the v2 patch later.