Re: Proposal: Disable autoload of compat_xyz modules

[David Holland <dholland-tech%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 07:01:29PM +0200, Maxime Villard wrote:
 > Typically, the situation I want to avoid is this [1], where you had some
 > random compat code next to critical native procedures. Note also that the
 > recent callgate vulnerability in amd64 wouldn't have existed, had the
 > separation between native and compat code been stark.

You could just as easily argue that similar functions should be
grouped together, so an issue found in one gets fixed in all versions
instead of leading to exploits and embarrassing advisories later on.

That said, it's not wrong to have a compat/arch. In fact, after trying
out various configurations in research kernels over the years my
recommendation is to have an arch dir in each subsystem dir that needs
one (thus, sys/uvm/arch, sys/dev/arch, etc.) rather than one big one.

Of course we don't really have subsystem dirs yet either.

but big reorgs need migration to a version control system that
supports rename... (deepseagreen4)

-- 
David A. Holland
dholland%netbsd.org@localhost