[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20211221115828.cnuazprjdgfpebag@ava.usersys.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2021 11:58:28 +0000
From: Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@...hat.com>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, jeyu@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-modules@...r.kernel.org,
atomlin@...mlin.com, ghalat@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] module: Introduce module unload taint tracking
On Mon 2021-12-13 16:16 +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > I'm not so sure about this. We could gather such details already via Ftrace
> > (e.g. see load_module()). Personally, I'd prefer to maintain a simple list.
>
> Fair enough. It was just an idea. Simple list is a good start. We
> could always add more details if people find it useful.
Indeed we could.
> Also we should keep in mind that the default panic() message should
> be reasonably short. Only the last lines might be visible on screen.
> Serial consoles might be really slow.
Absolutely, I agree. This feature should be entirely optional. In fact, it
is likely only useful while reviewing the data via /proc/vmcore given the
potential amount of data generated, in addition to that seen in
panic_print_sys_info(), when explicitly enabled.
Kind regards,
--
Aaron Tomlin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists