linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] watchdog: Check WDOG_STOP_ON

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 13 Feb 2020 20:23:53 +0000
From:   Dmitry Safonov <dima@...sta.com>
To:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454c46@...il.com>,
        Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>,
        linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] watchdog: Check WDOG_STOP_ON_REBOOT in reboot
 notifier

Hi Guenter,

On 2/13/20 7:12 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> Does that really have to be decided at runtime, by the user ?
> How about doing it with a module parameter ?
> 
> Also, I am not sure if an ioctl is the best means to do this, if it indeed
> makes sense to decide it at runtime. ioctl implies an open watchdog device,
> which interferes with the watchdog daemon. This means that the watchdog
> daemon would have to be modified to support this, making this a quite expensive
> change. It also implies that the action would have to be known when the
> watchdog daemon is started, suggesting that a module parameter should be
> sufficient.

Yes, fair points. I went with ioctl() because the timeout can be changed
in runtime. But you're right, I'll look into making it a module
parameter instead.

Thanks for the review and time,
          Dmitry