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  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:   Fri, 8 Jan 2021 16:15:16 +0100
From:   Greg KH <>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <>
Cc:     zhenwei pi <>,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] misc: pvpanic: introduce module parameter 'events'

On Fri, Jan 08, 2021 at 04:04:24PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 08/01/21 15:07, Greg KH wrote:
> > >   static void __iomem *base;
> > > +static unsigned int events = PVPANIC_PANICKED | PVPANIC_CRASH_LOADED;
> > > +module_param(events, uint, 0644);
> > > +MODULE_PARM_DESC(events, "set event limitation of pvpanic device");
> > I do not understand you wanting a module parameter as well as a sysfs
> > file.  Why is this needed?  Why are you spreading this information out
> > across different apis and locations?
> It can be useful to disable some functionality, for example in case you want
> to fake running on an older virtualization host.  This can be done for
> debugging reasons, or to keep uniform handling across a fleet that is
> running different versions of QEMU.

And where is this all going to be documented?

And what's wrong with just making the sysfs attribute writable?


greg k-h

Powered by blists - more mailing lists