linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] tracing: Changes for 5.6

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:   Tue, 4 Feb 2020 08:46:42 -0500
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        Tom Zanussi <zanussi@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] tracing: Changes for 5.6

On Tue, 4 Feb 2020 13:19:06 +0000
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

> 
> Because it strikes me that the bootconfig should be the special case
> (ie "bootconfig does setup for boot-time tracing"), and that you
> should explicitly say "I want you to read the extended config" on the
> regular kernel command line.
> 
> So from looking at this, I do have to say that I'd have a slight
> preference for simply making this be an option like
> "config=bootconfig" that says "extend cmdline with the data from the
> 'bootconfig' file".

OK, I like this idea. As the current approach "silently" adds the boot
config, it may be surprising to someone that the configs are changing
(if they don't know to look for /proc/bootconfig).

Having a "config=bootconfig" required for reading makes it implicit
that a bootconfig is added to the existing command line, from just
looking at /proc/cmdline, and removing an added "config=bootconfig" 

> 
> Would that be horribly painful for your uses?
> 

I have no problem with this approach. Masami, are you OK with this?

I'll send a v2 implementing this change shortly.

-- Steve