Re: [PATCH v3] sysctl: control functionality of /proc/pid/mem
From: Kees Cook
Date: Tue Jan 31 2012 - 14:22:44 EST
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 3:51 AM, Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 13:12 +0200, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
>> On 1/24/12, Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >> + .procname = "proc_pid_mem",
>> >> + .data = &sysctl_proc_pid_mem,
>> >> + .maxlen = sizeof(int),
>> >> + .mode = 0644,
>> >> + .proc_handler = proc_dointvec_minmax,
>> >> + .extra1 = &zero,
>> >> + .extra2 = &two,
>> >> + },
>>
>> >E.g. moving all such stuff to some sysctl group, not bloating
>> > kernel.*.
>>
>> Ehh.
>> How bloat is measured in this case?
>
> Do we want to add such sort of sysctls "from time to time" when we
> consider one or another feature as deprecated? If yes, I'd group them
> somehow, e.g. by introducing subdirectory inside of kernel.
>
> Btw, kernel sysctl dir contains all sort of stuff which goes to "kernel"
> as if it is "etc". It already contains ftrace, perf, printk, scheduler,
> ipc. IMHO plain kernel hierarchy is not profitable in the long term.
Yeah, after reconsidering this, this sysctl is not the right approach.
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
ChromeOS Security
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/