RE: 2.7 thoughts
From: Frederick, Fabian (Fabian.Frederick_at_prov-liege.be)
Date: 10/09/03
- Previous message: Erik Mouw: "Re: two sym53c8xx.o modules"
- Maybe in reply to: Svetoslav Slavtchev: "2.7 thoughts"
- Next in thread: Jens Axboe: "Re: 2.7 thoughts"
- Reply: Jens Axboe: "Re: 2.7 thoughts"
- Reply: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz: "Re: 2.7 thoughts"
- Reply: Gábor Lénárt: "Re: 2.7 thoughts"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
To: lgb@lgb.hu Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 15:17:05 +0200
Gabor,
Here's a first "2.7 thoughts" listing with some questions...
2.7 features
* slab allocation quota
* ntfs full support
* kernel web server (Interfaced to Roman config tool)
* ipc to sysfs
* complete user quota centralization
* Add _responsibilities_ for virtual process tree and possible
relation in oops cases
* Does the whole proc vm stuff root/box relevant ?I don't think
so....Hence, those proc entries deserve security relevant attributes
* Devices should be limited as well against bad usage(floppy defect),
viral activity(netcard rush)...
* All this guides me to a more global conclusion in which all that
stuff should be kobject registration relevant
* Meanwhile, we don't have a kobject <-> security bridge :(
* bind mount support for all general mount options (nodev,ro,noexec etc)
with SECURE implementation with any (maybe even future) filesystems?
* union mount (possible with option to declare on what fs a new file
should be created: on fixed ones, random algorithm, on fs with the
largest free space available etc ...)
<LVM ?
* guaranteed i/o bandwidth allocation?
* netfilter's ability to do tricks which OpenBSD can do now with its
packet filter
* ENBD support in official kernel with enterprise-class 'through the
network' volume management
< NFS ?
* more and more tunable kernel parameters to be able to have some user
space program which can 'tune' the system for the current load,usage,etc
of the server ("selftune")
<What parameters would you add in procfs ?
* more configuration options to be able to use Linux at the low end as well
(current kernels are too complex, too huge and sometimes contains too
many unwanted features for a simple system, though for most times it is
enough but can be even better)
* Virtual machine support
<Maybe more 3.0 relevant ?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Previous message: Erik Mouw: "Re: two sym53c8xx.o modules"
- Maybe in reply to: Svetoslav Slavtchev: "2.7 thoughts"
- Next in thread: Jens Axboe: "Re: 2.7 thoughts"
- Reply: Jens Axboe: "Re: 2.7 thoughts"
- Reply: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz: "Re: 2.7 thoughts"
- Reply: Gábor Lénárt: "Re: 2.7 thoughts"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
