From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Subject: Re: [PATCH] IPVS: Fix sysctl warnings about missing strategy Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 18:10:58 -0700 Message-ID: References: <200711131129.58868.borntraeger@de.ibm.com> <20071113.024500.155458534.davem@davemloft.net> <20071114021131.GB2523@verge.net.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Simon Horman , David Miller , borntraeger@de.ibm.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, wensong@linux-vs.org To: Julian Anastasov Return-path: Received: from ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com ([166.70.28.69]:58057 "EHLO ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758424AbXKOBMD (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Nov 2007 20:12:03 -0500 In-Reply-To: (Julian Anastasov's message of "Thu, 15 Nov 2007 02:38:32 +0200 (EET)") Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Julian Anastasov writes: > I assume /proc/sys is still valid place, only sysctl interface > is scheduled for removal. Yes. The ascii versions of the sysctls that show up in /proc/sys are definitely still valid. > So, as long as these entries are not > accessible from sysctl it is safe to run without strategy handler but if > values can be changed then we will need strategy handler to > properly call update_defense_level() as done in proc_do_defense_mode() > as proc_handler. There could be side effects if new mode is not applied. Yes. The current mode of 0644 allows them to be both read and updated with sys_sysctl. By removing the ctl_name entry those entries become inaccessible from the /proc/sys interface. Which is some easier then writing a strategy routine. Eric