Re: Stacking - anyone care how to report module id's?

From: Greg KH (gregat_private)
Date: Mon Aug 26 2002 - 11:15:23 PDT

  • Next message: jmjonesat_private: "Re: Stacking - anyone care how to report module id's?"

    On Mon, Aug 26, 2002 at 11:02:17AM -0700, Crispin Cowan wrote:
    > Greg KH wrote:
    > 
    > >Huh?  What is going to scale poorly?  The current sys_security() call?
    > >I don't see anything in the current code tha scales badly.  All I hear
    > >is vague statements about how some code, sometime in the future that
    > >impmenents a sys_security() hook, might not scale well.
    > >
    > Thus is the nature of API design: you design the interface for 
    > anticipated future needs, not just what's on the table. "640k ought to 
    > be enough for anybody." :)
    
    This is not the nature of Linux kernel API design, sorry.  Go see the
    _many_ threads about things like this on lkml over the years for
    validation of this.
    
    > >Come on people, if there is a real problem, I'd be glad to deal with it.
    > >And as there is no posted code showing a problem,
    > >
    > But there IS code dealing with it: David came to the group *with code* 
    > and pointed out that he cannot reasonably implement his Stacker function 
    > with the API as-is. I don't count the polling response as "reasonable"; 
    > that's a kludge to get around a limitation in the API.
    
    And I posted code that David was happy with that works with the API
    as-is.  Where's the problem?
    
    As David is implementing a Stacker type module, he is going to have to
    do exactly the same thing for _all_ hooks that you seem to find so ugly.
    The sys_security() call is not a special case here.  David just didn't
    realize that sys_security() needs to return -ENOSYS if that specific
    module does not want to handle the sys_security() call.
    
    It could be argued that the overhead for doing this kind of work for all
    of the hooks is far greater than any overhead for the sys_security()
    call, so something else needs to be changed to make it easier for
    modules to stack, but I'm not going to bring that up...  :)
    
    thanks,
    
    greg k-h
    _______________________________________________
    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 Aug 26 2002 - 11:16:32 PDT