linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86/Kconfig: Allow CONFIG_X86

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:   Fri, 2 Jun 2023 07:23:31 -0700
From:   Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To:     Saurabh Singh Sengar <ssengar@...rosoft.com>,
        Saurabh Sengar <ssengar@...ux.microsoft.com>,
        "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
        "dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>, "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
        KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>,
        Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
        "wei.liu@...nel.org" <wei.liu@...nel.org>,
        Dexuan Cui <decui@...rosoft.com>,
        "Michael Kelley (LINUX)" <mikelley@...rosoft.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org" <linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86/Kconfig: Allow CONFIG_X86_MPPARSE disable for OF
 platforms

On 6/2/23 05:22, Saurabh Singh Sengar wrote:
> Furthermore, I would like to learn about the rationale behind disallowing the
> disablement of CONFIG_X86_MPPARSE when MP tables are not in use. Considering
> that we compile out the features we don't support, wouldn't it be acceptable to
> allow users to customize their configurations in this manner? Allowing the
> disablement of CONFIG_X86_MPPARSE would provide greater flexibility and
> efficiency for those who do not utilize MP tables.

If someone sent a patch, I'd certainly look and figure out what
"flexibility" and "efficiency" it would provide.  But, honestly, it
would just just be noise if it doesn't solve an _actual_ problem.

Would anyone care or notice the "flexibility" and "efficiency" it would
provide?