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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Thu, 10 Jul 2014 17:44:25 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <>
To:	Guenter Roeck <>
	Wim Van Sebroeck <>,
	Catalin Marinas <>,
	Maxime Ripard <>,
	Will Deacon <>,
	Arnd Bergmann <>,
	Heiko Stuebner <>,
	Russell King <>,
	Jonas Jensen <>,
	Randy Dunlap <>,
	Steven Rostedt <>,
	Ingo Molnar <>,
	Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <>,
	David Woodhouse <>,
	Tomasz Figa <>,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/7] kernel: Add support for restart notifier call

On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 17:15:49 -0700 Guenter Roeck <> wrote:

> Error on my part - I thought lower numbers would
> have higher priority, but after looking into the code again that
> is wrong.

You shouldn't have needed to look into the code :( Maybe a
documentation patch for notifier_block.priority for the next person?

> To avoid making things too complicated, maybe it would make sense to
> specify guidelines for notifier priorities, such as
> 0   - restart notifier of last resort, with least reset capabilities
> 128 - default; use if no other notifier is expected to be available
>        and/or if restart functionality is acceptable
> 255 - highest priority notifier which _must_ be used
> Would that make sense and be acceptable ? In this context, I would then
> set the notifier priorities for the callers in the patch set to 128.

Yep, that sounds nice.  It's unlikely to see a lot of use, but at least
we showed we thought about it ;)
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists