On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 6:32 AM Karim Yaghmour karim.yaghmour@opersys.com wrote:
On 4/16/19 9:04 AM, Joel Fernandes wrote:
On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 02:49:39PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 08:33:06AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Mon, 15 Apr 2019 22:50:10 -0500 Kees Cook keescook@chromium.org wrote:
On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 9:41 AM Steven Rostedt rostedt@goodmis.org wrote:
I agree with this assessment. We shouldn't use config.gz as precedence for this solution. config.gz should have been in debugfs to begin with, but I don't believe debugfs was around when config.gz was introduced. (Don't have time to look into the history of the two).
I don't agree with this: /proc/config.gz is used by a lot of tools that do sanity-check of running systems. This isn't _debugging_... it's verifying correct kernel builds. It's a fancy version of checking /proc/version.
Then we should perhaps make a new file system call tarballs ;-)
/sys/kernel/tarballs/
and place everything there. That way it removes it from /proc (which is the worse place for that) and also makes it something other than debug. That's what I did for tracefs.
As horrible as that suggestion is, it does kind of make sense :)
We can't put this in debugfs as that's only for debugging and systems should never have that mounted for normal operations (users want to build ebpf programs), and /proc really should be for processes but that horse is long left the barn.
But, I'm willing to consider putting this either in a system-fs-like filesystem, or just in sysfs itself, we do have /sys/kernel/ to play around in if the main objection is that we should not be cluttering up /proc with stuff like this.
I am ok with the suggestion of /sys/kernel for the archive. That also seems to fit well with the idea that the headers are kernel related and probably belong here more strictly speaking, than /proc.
This makes sense. And if it alleviates concerns regarding extending /proc ABIs then might as well switch to this.
Olof, what do you think of this?
In practice we've been more lenient with changes to /sys over time, so I think this might be a reasonable compromise.
I still think that a filesystem view is the cleanest way to do this, but I won't push back from this going in. It does solve a real problem, and if we want a different format later we can revisit it then.
-Olof