linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] printk: Make CONSOLE_LOGLEVEL

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, 20 Jun 2018 10:07:53 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc:     Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] printk: Make CONSOLE_LOGLEVEL_QUIET configurable

On Wed, 20 Jun 2018 13:03:35 +0200
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com> wrote:

> I find it a bit confusing that "quiet" would mean something different
> on different systems.

I disagree. "quiet" to me is for people that really don't care to see
anything from the kernel except for real issues that they need to
report. The first thing that I do, and many other kernel developers I
know, when installing a new distro, is to remove the "quiet" from the
command line. Because *I* care about the output.

> 
> Why did not you use loglevel=<whatever_you_need> instead of "quiet"?
> 
> Alternative solution would be to add "silent" or so to calm down
> everything. But I am afraid that any change in this area would
> just create a mess similar to grep -s and -q options.
> 
> 
> Best Regards,
> Petr
> 
> PS: I will not block it if Steven and Sergey are fine with this. But
> I want to be sure that they considered the above views. It looked like
> a no-brainer to me at the beginning. I even pushed this to printk.git.
> But the pushing gave me some more time to think about it...

I prefer this patch over adding yet another kernel command line command
that will just add to the confusion. I can imagine people saying
"what's the difference between 'quiet' and 'silent'?". I would.

I think having it as a config option is the perfect solution. I imagine
that as soon as Red Hat changes the meaning of "quiet" so will all the
other distros. The alternative is for the distros to add a patch to
make the change, which honestly is a worse solution.

I've only seen "quiet" added by distros and not by average developers.
I don't think adding this option will be confusing to anyone that
tinkers with kernel command lines anyway.

I'm for the patch.

Acked-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt@...dmis.org>

-- Steve