linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] printk: console: Allow each console to have its own loglevel

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: <YoaEjNrBLjPBtx/p@chrisdown.name>
Date:   Thu, 19 May 2022 18:55:24 +0100
From:   Chris Down <chris@...isdown.name>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        kernel-team@...com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] printk: console: Allow each console to have its own
 loglevel

Greg Kroah-Hartman writes:
>> So, just to try to come to a solution, here's the lay of the land as I
>> understand it. Currently pretty much all consoles are statically defined
>> (and most of the non-static cases are false positives)
>>
>>     % git grep 'struct console.*=' -- '*.c' | awk '/static/ { print "static"; } !/static/ { print "non-static" }' | sort | uniq -c
>>          15 non-static
>>         105 static
>
>ah, ok, then we have a problem, and your change to the struct device
>being a pointer is correct.
>
>That's the problem when you only see a tiny bit of the kernel in a
>patch, sorry for the confusion.

No worries! Just glad we got to the bottom of it :-)

>But you still need to free the device structure that is pointed to by
>the device in the release function.  Your release function can not be
>"empty" like your original patch was.

Great, then I'll implement it like the earlier diff I posted unless you have 
any objections.

Thanks a lot for your help and advice!