linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arch/s390/configs: Change CONFIG_VIRTIO

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: <20210428110821.70aa5774.cohuck@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 28 Apr 2021 11:08:21 +0200
From:   Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>
To:     Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
Cc:     Thomas Huth <thuth@...hat.com>, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
        Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Marc Hartmayer <mhartmay@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arch/s390/configs: Change CONFIG_VIRTIO_CONSOLE to "m"

On Wed, 28 Apr 2021 10:31:54 +0200
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com> wrote:

> On 28.04.21 10:24, Thomas Huth wrote:
> > In former times, the virtio-console code had to be compiled into
> > the kernel since the old guest virtio transport had some hard de-
> > pendencies. But since the old virtio transport has been removed in
> > commit 7fb2b2d51244 ("s390/virtio: remove the old KVM virtio transport"),
> > we do not have this limitation anymore.
> > Commit bb533ec8bacd ("s390/config: do not select VIRTIO_CONSOLE via
> > Kconfig") then also lifted the hard setting in the Kconfig system, so
> > we can finally switch the CONFIG_VIRTIO_CONSOLE knob to compile this
> > driver as a module now, making it more flexible for the user to only
> > load it if it is really required.  
> 
> Isnt that a distro specific decision? I would be perfectly fine to have
> this change in Fedora, Redhat and co. Not so sure about defconfig.
> We often use the defconfig in our CI and development things to have a
> kernel config that boots up fine, even without a ramdisk. I agree that
> virtio console is no longer really the most important console but does
> it really hurt? Is any distro using the defconfig unmodified?

Having a value in the defconfig that will be sensible for most users
sounds good to me, independent of what different distros choose to do.
(Or am I misunderstanding the purpose of the defconfig?)

For booting without a ramdisk, I see that virtio-blk and virtio-input
are y, while other virtio drivers are m. That should be sufficient,
shouldn't it?