[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a9508cc3-3385-256e-2f27-c1e0a770ba69@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 17:53:57 -0400
From: Sinan Kaya <Okaya@...nel.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
Adrian Reber <adrian@...as.de>,
Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] init: Do not select DEBUG_KERNEL by default
On 4/10/2019 5:45 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 2:26 PM Sinan Kaya <okaya@...nel.org> wrote:
>>
>> We can't seem to have a kernel with CONFIG_EXPERT set but
>> CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL unset these days.
>>
>> While some of the features under the CONFIG_EXPERT require
>> CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL, it doesn't apply for all features.
>>
>> The meaning of CONFIG_EXPERT and CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL has been
>> mixed here.
>
> I don't agree: the point of EXPERT is to show _everything_, which
> means DEBUG_KERNEL should be selected to show those options as well. I
> think this is fine as-is. What is the problem you want to solve?
>
> I think of it as low (nothing selected) medium (DEBUG_KERNEL) and high
> (EXPERT and DEBUG_KERNEL). So EXPERT enables DEBUG_KERNEL too.
>
Sure, let's see if there is a better option.
I don't want any of the debug features in my kernel but still
need all the expert features. My kernel is considered a production
kernel. I don't really want to ship all the good debug enables.
On the other hand, I need the features under CONFIG_EXPERT to have
a functional system.
Let's take "multiple users" as an example.
What's the point of having a kernel without multiple users? :)
I don't see the relationship between CONFIG_DEBUG and CONFIG_EXPERT
as none of the features except KALLSYMS depend on it. If there was
a compile time dependency, I'd say move it to the things that need
it as this patch suggests.
P.S. I found a circular dependency now. I can respin the patch based
on feedback.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists