lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Apr]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 3/3] p9auth: add p9auth driver
    From
    On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 8:36 PM, Serge E. Hallyn <serue@us.ibm.com> wrote:

    > An fs actually seems overkill for two write-only files for
    > process-related information.  Would these actually be candidates
    > for new /proc files?
    >
    >        /proc/grantcred - replaces /dev/caphash, for privileged
    >                tasks to tell the kernel about new setuid
    >                capabilities
    >        /proc/self/usecred - replaces /dev/capuse for unprivileged
    >                tasks to make use of a setuid capability

    An fs is fine.

    To relate this to Plan 9, where it all began, might be useful. There's
    no equivalent in Plan 9 to Linux/Unix devices of the major/minor
    number etc. variety. In-kernel drivers and out-of-kernel servers both
    end up providing the services (i.e. file name spaces) that we see in a
    Linux file system. So the Plan 9 driver for the capability device
    really does match closely in function and interface to a Linux
    kernel-based file system.

    Hence, making devcap a file system is entirely appropriate, because it
    best fits the way it works in Plan 9: a kernel driver that provides
    two files.

    It's pretty easy to write a Linux VFS anyway, so it makes sense from
    that point of view.

    Eric, that was a great suggestion.

    ron
    --
    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: 2010-04-24 18:27    [W:0.027 / U:62.460 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site