linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] kdb: Fix breakpoint enable to be silent if already enabled

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: <20241028192624.GA918552@lichtman.org>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2024 19:26:24 +0000
From: Nir Lichtman <nir@...htman.org>
To: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Cc: jason.wessel@...driver.com, daniel.thompson@...aro.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kdb: Fix breakpoint enable to be silent if already
 enabled

On Mon, Oct 28, 2024 at 11:38:00AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
> 
> On Sun, Oct 27, 2024 at 1:47 PM Nir Lichtman <nir@...htman.org> wrote:
> >
> > Fix the breakpoint enable command (be) to a logic that is inline with the
> > breakpoint disable command (bd) in which if the breakpoint is already in
> > an enabled state, do not print the message of enabled again to the user.
> >
> 
> I don't ever use these commands (if I'm setting breakpoints them I'm
> using kgdb, not kdb), but this seems OK to me in general. I'm a little
> curious why you don't also make the "breakpoint clear" command
> consistent.

That's a good point I haven't looked at the bc logic,
will fix that as well and send a v2.

Thanks for the review,
Nir

> 
> -Doug