Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86: Allow disabling of sys_iopl, sys_ioperm
From: Jiri Kosina
Date: Mon Jul 18 2011 - 10:35:24 EST
On Thu, 14 Jul 2011, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> >> Wouldn't it be more useful for this to be a sysctl? In particular, like
> >> many similar things it probably should be a lockable sysctl (three
> >> states: enabled, disabled, and locked-disabled).
> >> Making it a compile-time option I'm very skeptical to.
> > Are there existing examples of this already in the tree?
> I think so, but I don't know off the top of my head.
/proc/sys/kernel/modules_disabled is a sort-of that kind of thing (it
doesn't have three states, but only two -- enabled and locked-disabled).
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/