On 4/17/07, Evgeniy Polyakov <[email protected]> wrote:
On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 04:01:51PM +0200, Francis Moreau ([email protected]) wrote:
> On 4/17/07, Herbert Xu <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >Yep. We don't need such a flag anyway. All we need is a way to tweak
> >the priority and Bob's your uncle.
> >
>
> Could you elaborate please, I don't see how you prevent others users
> to use this module with priority.
>
> Priority is a stuff that tells you which aes implementation to use but
> it does not prevent an implementation to be used several times...
Preventing anyone from using the module is incorrect.
How will you handle the case when you have only one algo registered and
it will be exclusively used by ecryptfs?
As I tried to explain, in that case the admin must load the module
without the exclusive flag.
Herbert proposes to register _second_ algo (say aes-generic(prio_100)
and aes_for_ecryptfs(prio_1)) with lower prio, so generic access will
never try to catch aes_for_ecryptfs, but your code still can access it
using full name.
yes but my worries with this approach is that nothing prevent an admin
to load others modules that will use aes_for_ecryptfs. And an admin is
not always aware about a module implementation.
Thanks
--
Francis
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
