linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] crash: Default to CRASH_DUMP=n when support for it is unlikely

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: <ZtFnFaHfh09wOw6o@MiWiFi-R3L-srv>
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2024 14:30:45 +0800
From: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
To: Dave Vasilevsky <dave@...ilevsky.ca>
Cc: glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
	linux-sh@...r.kernel.org, mpe@...erman.id.au,
	kexec@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Reimar Döffinger <Reimar.Doeffinger@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] crash: Default to CRASH_DUMP=n when support for it is
 unlikely

On 08/29/24 at 11:37pm, Dave Vasilevsky wrote:
> On 2024-08-29 23:15, Baoquan He wrote:
> >> +config ARCH_DEFAULT_CRASH_DUMP
> >> +	def_bool n
> > 
> > If we don't add ARCH_DEFAULT_CRASH_DUMP at all in sh arch, the
> > CRASH_DUMP will be off by default according to the below new definition
> > of CRASH_DUMP?
> 
> Yes, that's true. But if we don't add it at all in sh arch, it looks confusing
> in the search feature of menuconfig:
> 
> > Symbol: ARCH_DEFAULT_CRASH_DUMP [=ARCH_DEFAULT_CRASH_DUMP]
> > Type  : unknown
> 
> So I thought it was better to explicitly set it to 'n'. What do you think?

If so, better adding it. Thanks.