On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 08:27:33PM -0700, Andrew Morgan wrote: > How will you handle backward compatibility? > > Kernel X has 75 function definitions in 'struct check_struct'. Kernel > X+1 has 76. Doesn't a module that was built for version X break in the > face of this? Are you going to rely on kernel module versioning to help > address this issue - namely, refuse to load a mis-matched module? We will handle it the same way all other kernel module interfaces handle it :) For the most part, logical APIs don't change during stable kernel releases. But they can, and it's up to the author of the specific security module to keep up with the changes. Or get your code accepted into the kernel proper and the person who changes the interface should also fix yours. We can add a version field (which Chris's prototype that had) if you want, but Linus has in the past rejected such solutions. Either way I don't think it's a problem (much better than the current problem of forward porting all of your hooks with each kernel release.) greg k-h -- greg@(kroah|wirex).com http://immunix.org/~greg _______________________________________________ linux-security-module mailing list linux-security-moduleat_private http://mail.wirex.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-security-module
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Apr 16 2001 - 21:48:52 PDT