linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] firmware/psci: demote suspend-mode warning to debug level

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Y1k3x12Z6nXoSD5l@hovoldconsulting.com>
Date:   Wed, 26 Oct 2022 15:36:07 +0200
From:   Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
To:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
        Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@...nel.org>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@...nel.org>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
        Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware/psci: demote suspend-mode warning to debug level

On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 02:24:58PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 04:32:52PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:

> > Trying to inform every user that a warning during boot is actually
> > benign and nothing to worry about generally seems backwards to me and is
> > not something that is likely to scale.
> 
> It's not *entirely* beningn; we still have to bodge around this not being to
> spec, and there are things that won't work (e.g. if we kexec to a kernel that
> expects the FW to actually follow the spec it claims to).
> 
> I agree with Sudeep that we should log something here, but I do appreciate that
> argumetn that for 90% of users this is not interesting.
> 
> I would suggest we make this:
> 
> 	pr_info(FW_BUG "failed to set PC mode: %d\n", ...);
> 
> ... so that it's always logged for those who care, but as it's INFO rather than
> WARNING, it'll easily be filtered out of logs (e.g. for users booting with
> "quiet"). Adding FW_BUG will also make this clear we're complaining about a FW
> bug rather than this being a kernel-internal error.

Sounds good. I'll respin.

Johan