| To: | Paul Jackson <pj@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier |
| From: | Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 8 Jan 2008 16:31:20 -0800 |
| Cc: | jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx, hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, pagg@xxxxxxxxxxx, erikj@xxxxxxx, matthltc@xxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20080108180309.4ccab28d.pj@sgi.com> |
| References: | <476A780C.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> <20071223122621.GA19310@infradead.org> <20071225140526.547a882f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <47838ACB.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> <20080108141424.de5d8fba.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080108180309.4ccab28d.pj@sgi.com> |
| Sender: | pagg-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Tue, 8 Jan 2008 18:03:09 -0600 Paul Jackson <pj@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Andrew wrote: > > What are those (unidentified) add-on features doing at present? > > Patching calls into fork.c/exec.c/exit.c? > > Most likely. I suspect we have general agreement and awareness > that such patching is not something that sells well in Linux-land. > And for good reason in my personal view ... such patching by loadable > modules could open the door to compromising the integrity of Linux in > ways that could be dangerous. > err, no. What I meant was that the providers of these mystery features are presumably also patching into fork.c/exec.c/exit.c at the source code level so as to enable the mystery features within their overall kernel package. If so, this doesn't sounds terribly onerous. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier, Paul Jackson |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier, Matt Helsley |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier, Paul Jackson |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier, Matt Helsley |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |