linux-kernel - Re: [for-next][PATCH 04/26] bootconfig: Add Extra Boot Config 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: <20200206225139.GH9741@zn.tnic>
Date:   Thu, 6 Feb 2020 23:51:39 +0100
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:     Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [for-next][PATCH 04/26] bootconfig: Add Extra Boot Config support

On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 05:39:45PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> Well, to me its as important as the kernel command line itself, and
> printk(). I know printk() can be disabled, should that be default 'n'?

You're arguing for a feature which might potentially become ubiquitous.
I don't think anyone minds it being built-in and even without a config
option when that happens. Just until that happens, it should have
been default n like all the other features we come up with and then
enable everywhere after sufficient amount of time of testing and
reporting/fixing bugs. Then even the config item gets removed. We do it
this way all the time.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette