linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/13] tty.h cleanups

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: <YHf3ojj44ex2dd3M@kroah.com>
Date:   Thu, 15 Apr 2021 10:21:54 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
        Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] tty.h cleanups

On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 09:32:45AM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 08:01:08PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 04:25:22PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 02:51:21PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > Turns out there is a lot of tty-internal stuff in include/linux/tty.h
> > > > that do not belong there.  Create a internal-to-the-tty-layer .h file
> > > > for these types of things and move function prototypes to it instead of
> > > > being in the system-wide header file.
> > > > 
> > > > Along the way clean up the use of some old tty-only debugging macros and
> > > > use the in-kernel dev_*() calls instead.
> > > 
> > > I'm afraid that's not a good idea since not all ttys have a
> > > corresponding class device. Notable exception include pseudo terminals
> > > and serdev.
> > > 
> > > While dev_printk() can handle a NULL device argument without crashing,
> > > we'll actually lose log information by removing the tty printk helpers.
> > 
> > I think the same info will be printed here as before, just some NULL
> > information at the beginning, right?  And the benifits overall (for real
> > tty devices), should outweigh the few devices that do not have this
> > information.
> 
> No, you'll only be losing information (tty driver and tty name). Here's
> a pty example, where the first line in each pair use dev_info() and the
> second tty_info():
> 
> [   10.235331] (NULL device *): tty_get_device
> [   10.235441] ptm ptm0: tty_get_device
> 
> [   10.235586] (NULL device *): tty_get_device
> [   10.235674] pts pts0: tty_get_device
> 
> and similar for serdev, which is becoming more and more common.

Ok, good point, I'll go apply only the first 2 patches in this series
(moving the macros out of tty.h and removing the unused one) and then
will redo this set of patches again.   I think a better tty_msg() macro
is warrented so that we can provide dev_*() output if we have a device,
otherwise fall back to the old style to preserve functionality.

thanks,

greg k-h