linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] soc: fujitsu: Add A64FX diagnostic interrupt driver

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: <OSZPR01MB70504BD8347355EB51F7CCB8EBFD9@OSZPR01MB7050.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Thu, 28 Apr 2022 02:15:52 +0000
From:   "hasegawa-hitomi@...itsu.com" <hasegawa-hitomi@...itsu.com>
To:     Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC:     Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        SoC Team <soc@...nel.org>,
        "open list:SERIAL DRIVERS" <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
        Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...aro.org>,
        Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
        Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com>,
        Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "kgdb-bugreport@...ts.sourceforge.net" 
        <kgdb-bugreport@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Mike Travis <mike.travis@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] soc: fujitsu: Add A64FX diagnostic interrupt
 driver

Hi Greg, Arnd, and Daniel,

> I understand that it is not appropriate to hardcode c.
> How about using __setup() to add a new kernel parameter and allow the admin
> to specify the sysrq command when booting?

I have received a lot of advice regarding sysrq, but after some consideration,
I would like to change to calling panic() directly as in v1 instead of sysrq.

If the administrator wants to request a diagnostic, I think they usually
expect crash with NMI like x86 and take a dump the kernel. It's not common
to handle diagnostic interrupts with sysrq now, so I don't think
it's necessary to make this driver extensible at this time.
Also, A64FX's BMC is not possible to send sideband data with the request,
so it is difficult to take advantage of the flexibility of sysrq.

If you have any comments on this, please reply.

Thank you
Hitomi Hasegawa