linux-kernel - Re: [Suspend-devel] [PATCH, 3rd try] make disable_console

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:	Mon, 18 Jun 2007 07:27:47 +0200
From:	Stefan Seyfried <seife@...e.de>
To:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, nigel@...el.suspend2.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	suspend-devel List <suspend-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [Suspend-devel] [PATCH, 3rd try] make disable_console_suspend runtime configurable

On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 11:49:40PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > > > I hate having to recompile the kernel, just to be able to debug suspend.
> > > > Remove CONFIG_DISABLE_CONSOLE_SUSPEND, replace it by a tunable in
> > > > /sys/power/disable_console_suspend.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Seyfried <seife@...e.de>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Frank Seidel <fseidel@...e.de>
> > > > ---
> > > > Third try, renamed sysfs interface to console_suspend 
> > > > reporting and expecting either "enabled" or "disabled"
> > > 
> > > Thanks a lot for redoing it.
> > > 
> > > I have no objections.  Pavel?
> > 
> > I still think that patch is bad. I should have screamed when
> > CONFIG_DISABLE_CONSOLE_SUSPEND went into kernel. That beast should
> > _not_ be configurable, it should just do the right thing.
> > 
> > But I realized that too late. And this only makes it works, making
> > that mistake part of user-kernel interface.
> > 
> > Sorry for not screaming when CONFIG_DISABLE_CONSOLE_SUSPEND went in,
> > but please lets solve this correctly....
> 
> Ouch and sorry for not screaming at "try 1" time. But it still does
> not make the patch right, and I believe that even patch authors agree
> that "no-config-needed" is superior solution.

No, i don't agree at all.

In this case, "no config needed" == "not possible to debug suspend problems".

IMO this is the same as issue as with "sysrq-C". You can crash the machine by
other means, but it sometimes is just handy to have a mechanism to do it.

I do not understand what's the problem with this option. If you want to avoid
that people use it for something else than debugging, i can add a patch that
crashes the machine ten seconds after resume if this option is set.
-- 
Stefan Seyfried
QA / R&D Team Mobile Devices        |              "Any ideas, John?"
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Nürnberg  | "Well, surrounding them's out." 

This footer brought to you by insane German lawmakers:
SUSE Linux Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/