On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 05:44:15PM +0100, Mike Wray wrote: > I'm not sure what was conceptually wrong. There are other multiplexing > syscalls > in the kernel - so the concept of multiplexing cannot be wrong? > Or is setsockopt broken too? It is conceptually wrong, yes. Just because a mistake has been made in the past there's no real reason to repeat it. > Netfilter provides nf_register_sockopt() to allow open-ended registration > of socket-opt handling by a module - without any review. So do many other > kernel interfaces. socket-opt handling does not come with different argument types. _______________________________________________ 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 Oct 21 2002 - 10:37:29 PDT