lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Nov]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: setting up CDB filters in udev (was Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] block: add queue-private command filter, editable via sysfs)
Il 02/11/2012 17:51, Tejun Heo ha scritto:
>>> > > What disturbs me is that it's a completely new interface to userland
>>> > > and at the same a very limited one at that. So, yeah, it's
>>> > > bothersome. I personally would prefer SCM_RIGHTS behavior change +
>>> > > hard coded filters per device class.
>> >
>> > I think hard-coded filters are bad (I prefer to move policy to
>> > userspace), and SCM_RIGHTS without a ioctl is out of question, really.
> No rule is really absolute. To me, it seems the suggested in-kernel
> per-device command code filter is both too big for the given problem

Is it? 150 lines of code? The per-class filters would share the first
two patches with this series, add a long list of commands to filter, and
the ioctl would be on top of that.

Long lists are better kept in configuration files than in kernel
sources; not to mention the higher cost of getting the API wrong for a
ioctl vs. sysfs.

> while being too limited for much beyond that.

What are the use cases beyond these? AFAIK these were the first two in
ten years or so...

> So, if we can get away
> with adding an ioctl, I personally think that would be a better
> approach.

I would really prefer to get a green light from Jens/James for per-class
filters in the kernel (which are worth a few hundred lines of data)
before implementing that.

Paolo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-11-02 19:21    [W:0.093 / U:0.168 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site