Um, preface... I apologize for being a bit "overzealous" last night. We're all working toward the same end, I think, just approaching things from different angles. I do tend to aggressively and assiduously advocate my positions. (^_^) On Tue, 1 May 2001, Crispin Cowan wrote: > Greg KH wrote: > > > On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 05:57:10PM -0700, Crispin Cowan wrote: > > > > > > However, Greg's point stands: building kernel modules is not for amateurs. > > > > No, I never said anything about "amateurs". ... Bad terminology choice :) > > Agreed, it was a poor choice of words. I was just trying to dispell the notion > that programming a module is like writing a user space app. With this I totally agree. It *is* different, and requires the development of special skills and the acquisition of special knowledge... I often stand in awe of the skills of guys like Greg K-H. User space apps have the luxury of not having to deal directly with hardware or worry too much about interfering with the overall system operation (within reasonable bounds)... that's in the province of the kernel/module. Momma kernel is charged with keeping her babies in line... not always easy when they're spoiled brats. > > And with regard to Melvin's points: I have no problem what so ever with clear > documentation in human-readable form. Obviously, I encourage it. Such > documentation would primarily need to address two points: > > * the abstract concepts embodied in the LSM interface > * the technical details, i.e. each interface function > Thanks. Think of the code as teaching the kernel, the documentation as teaching the module programmer, and the specific purpose of the two co-existing is to make it easier for each to "understand" the other... avoiding as many "misunderstandings" as possible. Since *I* am going to have to struggle through the human translation for myself, I'd rather preserve the effort in something generally useful to many (and any help I can get makes it easier.) > You can try to document them now, but they will change. If you want to document > it now, and then update it later, great, but it will take work to track rapid > development. Go for it if you want to. Fully understood. Change is good and understanding the evolution of things as they come into being is, imho, worth the effort. It can take just as long to develop documentation as code, and both go through similar "pangs and revisions". > > Crispin > > -- > Crispin Cowan, Ph.D. > Chief Scientist, WireX Communications, Inc. http://wirex.com > Security Hardened Linux Distribution: http://immunix.org J. Melvin Jones |>------------------------------------------------------ || J. MELVIN JONES jmjonesat_private |>------------------------------------------------------ || Microcomputer Systems Consultant || Software Developer || Web Site Design, Hosting, and Administration || Network and Systems Administration |>------------------------------------------------------ || http://www.jmjones.com/ |>------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ 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 : Wed May 02 2001 - 07:32:59 PDT