linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] Documentation: Merge x86-specific boot options doc into kernel-parameters.txt

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <ad1ceef4-b98d-4fca-90b9-b9b09e311001@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2024 15:15:12 -0800
From: Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@...el.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC: Borislav Petkov <bp@...nel.org>, <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, X86 ML
	<x86@...nel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Documentation: Merge x86-specific boot options doc
 into kernel-parameters.txt

On 11/20/2024 1:11 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 12:49:10PM -0800, Sohil Mehta wrote:
>> Instead of double tabs and <option>: <description>, would this be more
>> readable if the options and their descriptions are separated?
> 
> Have you seen the rest of this file?
> 

To clarify, I am not suggesting to have the description at less than 2
tab distance from the main command line option. It's just the
sub-option. It would still keep everything aligned with the rest of the
file.

	mce=
		<sub-option-1>
			[Description - ...]

		<sub-option-2>
			[Description - ...]

I see quite a few places that do exactly as the above:
 console=
 console_msg_format=
 earlycon=
 hibernate=
 intel_iommu=
 io_delay=
 pcie_*=

In some other cases such as pci=, mitigations=, spectre_v2_user= and
vsyscall= the sub-option is at a 1-2 tab distance and the description is
another 1-2 tabs from that.

Either way, in most places, I see the sub-option and description being
separated which is all I am requesting. (Pretty please?)

efi= and idle= has it similar to the way you have proposed for mce= but
I find it harder to read. (Maybe it's just me.)