linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] watchdog: add watchdog pretimeout framework

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 8 Jun 2016 18:11:06 +0300
From:	Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir_zapolskiy@...tor.com>
To:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
CC:	Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ana.be>, Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
	Robin Gong <b38343@...escale.com>,
	<linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] watchdog: add watchdog pretimeout framework

On 08.06.2016 16:53, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 06/08/2016 06:37 AM, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
> 
>>>>
>>>> +comment "Watchdog Pretimeout Governors"
>>>> +
>>>> +config WATCHDOG_PRETIMEOUT_GOV
>>>> +	bool "Enable watchdog pretimeout governors"
>>>> +	default n
>>>
>>> I don't think 'default n" is needed.
>>>
>>
>> No strict objections, but probably 'default n' may save quite many
>> lines in defconfigs.
>>
> 
> I always wondered why it would be necessary to say "default n".
> What is the difference between "default n" and no explicit default ?
> 

I pointed out that it may have impact on defconfig, but experimentally
it has no effect.

Users of "make oldconfig" get a prompt in both cases as well.

Also I haven't found any difference for silentoldconfig, olddefconfig
and alldefconfig, I assume explicit "default n" and "def_bool n"
can be safely dropped.

--
Best wishes,
Vladimir