Re: [PATCH 1/4] module: add syscall to load module from fd

From: Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
Date: Tue Oct 09 2012 - 18:03:56 EST


On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 11:58 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 10/10/2012 05:54 AM, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
>> Kees,
>>
>>> +SYSCALL_DEFINE2(finit_module, int, fd, const char __user *, uargs)
>>
>> Given the repeated experience of the last few years--new system calls
>> that are in essence revisions of older system calls with a 'flags'
>> argument bolted on to allow more flexible behavior (e.g., accept4(),
>> dup3(), utimensat(), epoll_create1(), pipe2(), inotify_init(1), and so
>> on.)--maybe it is worth considering adding a 'flags' bit mask
>> argument[1] to the finti_module() system call now, to allow for
>> possible future extensions to the behavior of the interface. What do
>> you think?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Michael
>>
>> [1] Yes, I know that init_module() doesn't have a flags argument, but
>> that interface was added when we'd seen fewer of the kinds of cases
>> listed above.
>>
>
> Then maybe go whole hog and make it an init_module_at() system call
> (allowing NULL for the pathname half to implement finit_module())...?

Good point. A "whole hog" openat()-style interface is worth thinking about too.

--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Author of "The Linux Programming Interface"; http://man7.org/tlpi/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/