linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH printk v1 01/18] kdb: do not assume write() callback available

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]

Date:   Thu, 9 Mar 2023 11:30:20 +0000
From:   Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>
To:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc:     John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com>,
        Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
        Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@...hat.com>,
        Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
        kgdb-bugreport@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH printk v1 01/18] kdb: do not assume write() callback
 available

On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 12:26:23PM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Thu 2023-03-09 10:52:40, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 02, 2023 at 09:02:01PM +0106, John Ogness wrote:
> > > It is allowed for consoles to provide no write() callback. For
> > > example ttynull does this.
> > >
> > > Check if a write() callback is available before using it.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>
> >
> > Any thoughts on best way to land the series. All via one tree or can
> > we pick and mix?
>
> I would prefer to take everything via the printk tree because
> most changes are there. Otherwise, we might end up with non-necessary
> cross-tree merge conflicts. Also I would know when all pieces are
> there.
>
> That said, this seems to be the only change in
> kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_io.c and it is relatively independent.
> So, it should not be a big problem to take it separately.

Enthusiastically
Acked-by: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>

That suits me fine: kgdb is pretty quiet at the moment so, whilst I
can't predict what patches will show up this cycle, this probably spares
me from having to put together a PR for a single patch!


Daniel.