![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Arjan van de Ven wrote: >>> it breaks ABI because this structure is communicated to userspace, and >>> you change both the layout and the size of it. What else would ABI >>> mean?? >>> >>> >> Many structures exported to user space in kernel are undergoing some >> change, A good application shouldn't count on invariability forever, >> My test application hasn't any problem before change and after change. >> > > > this is absolutely incorrect. This is an ABI that cannot change in any > incompatible way. > >>> but... what makes you think it's not a kernel thread such as kjournald? >>> (which have basically meaningless current) >>> >>> >> you can get values of these fields without any problem for kernel >> thread although they are useless. >> > > exactly > > >>> there is no "full path name" concept in linux like that. And even worse, >>> many processes will not have *any* path because they have been deleted, >>> especially the viruses will use this ;) >>> >>> >> For this case you said, this patch has now way really, do you have a >> good way to handle this case? >> > > it sounds that what you want to achieve is broken in the first place... > (or should use audit etc) > As I known, BSD process audit only can be done inside a process, and audit result is just visible after termination of this process, if an application wants to monitor all the processes, it has no way. My patch provides such a way bases on inotify with minimal work, it should be an good extension for inotify although it can't cover all the cases. > > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-03-10 01:29 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||