linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] clear_warn_once: bind a timer to written reset value

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: <20201130223647.71f8e621@oasis.local.home>
Date:   Mon, 30 Nov 2020 22:36:47 -0500
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
        John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] clear_warn_once: bind a timer to written reset
 value

On Mon, 30 Nov 2020 12:17:59 -0500
Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com> wrote:

> > Anyway, would there ever be a need to have it cleared in less than 1 minute
> > intervals?  
> 
> I don't think so - as I said in another follow up from last week:
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20201127174316.GA11748@windriver.com/
> 
> I'd also indicated in the above that I'd be fine with adding a minimum
> of 1m if people feel better about that.  Also maybe moving the units to
> minutes instead of seconds helps implicitly convey the intended use
> better -- i.e. "don't be smashing on this every second" -- maybe that
> was your point as well - and I'd agree with that.

That was my second point. That is, why would anyone care about a
resolution in seconds for this?

-- Steve