linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ARM: smp: Remove CPU: shutdown notice

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Wed, 18 Jan 2017 14:49:55 -0800
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:     Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...lanox.com>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@...hat.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: smp: Remove CPU: shutdown notice

On 01/18/2017 02:39 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 03:39:45PM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>> Well, for one it's inconsistent, and it also leaves room for subtle
>> timing/caching issues with some platforms (OK, maybe not so much).
>> Improving the speed and consistency was the primary motive.
> 
> Actually, it's not as inconsistent as you claim.
> 
> c68b0274fb3c ("ARM: reduce "Booted secondary processor" message to debug level")
> dropped the corresponding pr_info() in the bringup path to debug level,
> so to be consistent, this one should be dropped to debug level too.
> 
> Removing it arguably makes it more inconsistent!

OK, fair point, I missed that one.

> 
> So, I'd be willing to accept a patch lowering this to a pr_debug()
> to make it more consistent with the bringup path, but otherwise the
> consistency argument doesn't really stand.

Sounds good, thanks!
-- 
Florian