linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] watchdog: aspeed: Update bootstatus handling

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: <2531f830-6a36-4bd5-ba1e-9e19f0f66496@roeck-us.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2024 12:50:36 -0800
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To: Chin-Ting Kuo <chin-ting_kuo@...eedtech.com>,
 Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...econstruct.com.au>,
 Patrick Williams <patrick@...cx.xyz>,
 "wim@...ux-watchdog.org" <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>
Cc: "joel@....id.au" <joel@....id.au>,
 "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
 <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
 "linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
 "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 "linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org" <linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org>,
 "Peter.Yin@...ntatw.com" <Peter.Yin@...ntatw.com>,
 "Patrick_NC_Lin@...ynn.com" <Patrick_NC_Lin@...ynn.com>,
 "Bonnie_Lo@...ynn.com" <Bonnie_Lo@...ynn.com>,
 "DELPHINE_CHIU@...ynn.com" <DELPHINE_CHIU@...ynn.com>,
 BMC-SW <BMC-SW@...eedtech.com>,
 "chnguyen@...erecomputing.com" <chnguyen@...erecomputing.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] watchdog: aspeed: Update bootstatus handling

On 11/18/24 04:46, Chin-Ting Kuo wrote:
> Hi Guenter,
> 
> Thanks for the reply.
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Guenter Roeck <groeck7@...il.com> On Behalf Of Guenter Roeck
>> Sent: Friday, November 8, 2024 10:08 PM
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] watchdog: aspeed: Update bootstatus handling
>>
>> On 11/7/24 21:42, Chin-Ting Kuo wrote:
>>
>>> But now, I think it will be better to add a patch for creating a new
>>> reset reason, e.g., WDIOF_REBOOT or WDIOF_RESTART, in watchdog.h of
>>> uapi. Can I include this change, creating a new reset reason, in this
>>> patch series? Or, should I create an extra new patch series for this
>>> purpose?
>>>
>>
>> This is a UAPI change. That is a major change. It needs to be discussed
>> separately, on its own, and can not be sneaked in like this.
>>
> 
> Agree. However, how to trigger this discussion? Can I just send a new
> patch separately with only this UAPI modification? This is the first time
> I change such common source code.
> 

Yes. That needs to include arguments explaining why this specific new flag
even adds value. I for my part don't immediately see that value.

Guenter