linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] serial: DCC(JTAG) serial and console emulation support

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]

Message-ID: <AANLkTim5E5WwD64RJ7NAk6Zr9NZ6jstrKSmjRTL039VR@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 8 Oct 2010 15:20:03 -0400
From:	Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>
To:	Daniel Walker <dwalker@...eaurora.org>
Cc:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Hyok S. Choi" <hyok.choi@...sung.com>,
	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
	Jeff Ohlstein <johlstei@...cinc.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
	Ben Dooks <ben-linux@...ff.org>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>,
	Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>,
	Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com>,
	Tobias Klauser <tklauser@...tanz.ch>,
	Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com>,
	Philippe Langlais <philippe.langlais@...ricsson.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] serial: DCC(JTAG) serial and console emulation support

On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 15:01, Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-10-08 at 14:38 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 12:45, Daniel Walker wrote:
>> > On Fri, 2010-10-08 at 17:56 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
>> >> > I don't think the kernel is going to implode if we allow an optional
>> >> > ttyS override for debugging purposes.. I just don't see that "screwing"
>> >> > up the kernel.
>> >>
>> >> That is perhaps why you are not a subsystem maintainer.
>> >
>> > No, I'm sure it's not.
>> >
>> > What I was telling Greg is that this type of override is allowed right
>> > now, if you mod the source (everything is allowed if you mod the source
>> > right?) ..
>>
>> just because someone can mod the source code to add a root shell
>> doesnt mean we should accept patches to do it
>
> That's not what I was getting at. If you can mod the source to add the
> override, then adding in a patch which also requires you to mod the
> source to add the override should be acceptable because it's no
> different that what we currently have.

sorry, but you lost me.  all i see is "drop the hack code".
-mike
--
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/