linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V4] notifier/panic: Introduce panic_notifier

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <23044cc6-ae58-d464-d5d1-3b5e6d4202c8@igalia.com>
Date:   Tue, 8 Mar 2022 10:04:06 -0300
From:   "Guilherme G. Piccoli" <gpiccoli@...lia.com>
To:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc:     "bhe@...hat.com" <bhe@...hat.com>,
        "d.hatayama@...itsu.com" <d.hatayama@...itsu.com>,
        "kexec@...ts.infradead.org" <kexec@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "dyoung@...hat.com" <dyoung@...hat.com>,
        "linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        "vgoyal@...hat.com" <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
        "stern@...land.harvard.edu" <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
        "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com" 
        <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        "corbet@....net" <corbet@....net>,
        "halves@...onical.com" <halves@...onical.com>,
        "kernel@...ccoli.net" <kernel@...ccoli.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4] notifier/panic: Introduce panic_notifier_filter

On 08/03/2022 09:54, Petr Mladek wrote:
> [...]
> Honestly, I am not that keen about enforcing the priorities.
> 
> It would make sense only when the ordering is really important.
> Then there should be some rules. It should be obvious why
> something has to be done earlier than something else.
> 
> From my POV, it is just another complexity. Someone will need to
> assign the priority to the existing notifiers. People will wonder
> about it for newly added notifiers.
> 
> Reproducibility seems to be the only motivation. Is it really a
> problem? Do the notifiers affect each other?
> 
> Also the notifiers are typically registered by some early boot
> code. It will define some ordering out of box.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Petr

OK Petr, makes sense. I feel that one the pros of the approach would be
to document all the notifiers in the header, but I guess nothing
prevents me to do that heh
I don't need enforcing the priorities for this.

I liked the idea of having everything "reproducible" as you said, but we
could face the problem of how to order some independent notifiers...
would be something "ad-hoc".

I'll progress here without priorities for now, if somebody see an
advantage for that, we can use it.

Thanks for your points,


Guilherme