[lkml]   [2004]   [Apr]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: kernel stack challenge

    Sergiy Lozovsky wrote:

    > All LISP errors are incapsulated within LISP VM.

    A LISP VM is a big, giant, bloated.... *CHOKE* *COUGH* *SPUTTER*
    *SUFFOCATE* ... thing which SHOULD NEVER be in the kernel.

    If you want to use a more abstract language for describing kernel
    security policies, fine. Just don't use LISP.

    The right way to do it is this:

    - A user space interpreter reads text-based config files and converts
    them into a compact, easy-to-interpret code used by the kernel.

    - A VERY TINY kernel component is fed the security policy and executes it.

    Move as much of the processing as reasonable into user space. It's
    absolutely unnecessary to have the parser into the kernel, because
    parsing of the config files is done only when the ASCII text version

    It's absolutely unnecessary to have something as complex as LISP to
    interpret it, when something simple and compact could do just as well.

    Why do you choose LISP? Don't you want to use a language that sysadmins
    will actually KNOW?

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:02    [W:2.649 / U:1.076 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site