linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] xen/privcmd: make option visible in Kconfig

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: <c6de136f-a1b9-2643-3858-9cd3d76e6f57@suse.com>
Date:   Tue, 16 Nov 2021 17:05:07 +0100
From:   Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...e.com>
To:     Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
CC:     linux@...ssschuh.net, Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
        Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
        xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen/privcmd: make option visible in Kconfig

On 16.11.2021 16:01, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 16.11.21 15:55, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 16.11.2021 15:33, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>> This configuration option provides a misc device as an API to userspace.
>>> Make this API usable without having to select the module as a transitive
>>> dependency.
>>>
>>> This also fixes an issue where localyesconfig would select
>>> CONFIG_XEN_PRIVCMD=m because it was not visible and defaulted to
>>> building as module.
>>>
>>> Based-on-patch-by: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net>
>>> Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...e.com>
>>
>>> --- a/drivers/xen/Kconfig
>>> +++ b/drivers/xen/Kconfig
>>> @@ -259,9 +259,14 @@ config XEN_SCSI_BACKEND
>>>   	  if guests need generic access to SCSI devices.
>>>   
>>>   config XEN_PRIVCMD
>>> -	tristate
>>> +	tristate "Xen hypercall passthrough driver"
>>>   	depends on XEN
>>>   	default m
>>> +	help
>>> +	  The hypercall passthrough driver allows user land programs to perform
>>
>> Maybe worth adding "privileged" here? Albeit of course that's different
>> from the use of the word ...
> 
> I guess you mean "... allows privileged user programs ..." (another
> variant might be "The privileged hypercall passthrough ...")?

The former, yes.

Jan