[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171201163850.GC26327@u40b0340c692b58f6553c.ant.amazon.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2017 08:38:50 -0800
From: Eduardo Valentin <eduval@...zon.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Juerg Haefliger <juerg.haefliger@...onical.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
<mingo@...nel.org>, <tglx@...utronix.de>, <peterz@...radead.org>,
<hughd@...gle.com>, <luto@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: KAISER: kexec triggers a warning
On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 04:37:13PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 07:31:36AM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > The only question is whether we want to preserve _some_ kind of warning
> > there, or just axe it entirely.
>
> Right, my fear would be if we keep it, then we'd have to go and
> whitelist or somehow track those users which are an exception...
>
> OTOH, it might be prudent to have a warning to catch such abnormal
> situations...
But a warn like that on the kexec/kdump path can be scary for regular / unware users,
specially considering that kexec is almost common place for regular reboot.
>
> --
> Regards/Gruss,
> Boris.
>
> Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
>
--
All the best,
Eduardo Valentin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists