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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <9d8911dd-408a-4d78-b3d1-c5ee23dbf3fc@quicinc.com> Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2023 21:33:30 +0530 From: Pavan Kondeti <quic_pkondeti@...cinc.com> To: Mukesh Ojha <quic_mojha@...cinc.com> CC: Pavan Kondeti <quic_pkondeti@...cinc.com>, <corbet@....net>, <agross@...nel.org>, <andersson@...nel.org>, <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>, <robh+dt@...nel.org>, <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>, <conor+dt@...nel.org>, <keescook@...omium.org>, <tony.luck@...el.com>, <gpiccoli@...lia.com>, <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>, <vigneshr@...com>, <nm@...com>, <matthias.bgg@...il.com>, <kgene@...nel.org>, <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>, <bmasney@...hat.com>, <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>, <kernel@...cinc.com> Subject: Re: [Patch v6 10/12] pstore/ram: Add dynamic ramoops region support through commandline On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 04:02:33PM +0530, Mukesh Ojha wrote: > > > static int ramoops_pstore_open(struct pstore_info *psi) > > > { > > > @@ -915,14 +965,18 @@ static void __init ramoops_register_dummy(void) > > > /* > > > * Prepare a dummy platform data structure to carry the module > > > - * parameters. If mem_size isn't set, then there are no module > > > - * parameters, and we can skip this. > > > + * parameters. If mem_size isn't set, check for dynamic ramoops > > > + * size and use if it is set. > > > */ > > > - if (!mem_size) > > > + if (!mem_size && !dyn_ramoops_size) > > > return; > > > > If mem_size and dyn_ramoops_size are set, you are taking > > dyn_ramoops_size precedence here. The comment is a bit confusing, pls > > review it once. > > Ideally, both should not be set and there will always be > confusion. > > Do you think, if we use mem_size a single variable both for earlier > and dynamic ramoops where based on dyn_ramoops_size=true/on a boolean > it will take dynamic ramoops path and if not mentioned it will take older > path. > Sounds like a good idea to me. You would need a callback for mem_size module param handling. Because dyn_ramoops can be passed before mem_size parameter. Also, we can't make pstore ram as module i.e decoupling dynamic ramoops from pstore ram module. Thanks, Pavan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists