linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 5/9] powerpc: Use preempt_model

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: <51999b8e-61c0-48b7-b744-c83d39e7f311@csgroup.eu>
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2025 17:37:42 +0100
From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rt-devel@...ts.linux.dev,
 Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
 Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
 Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
 Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@...ux.ibm.com>, Steven Rostedt
 <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
 Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
 Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
 Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@...ux.ibm.com>,
 Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>, Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
 Naveen N Rao <naveen@...nel.org>, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/9] powerpc: Use preempt_model_str().

Le 03/02/2025 à 17:01, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior a écrit :
> On 2025-02-03 16:19:06 [+0100], Christophe Leroy wrote:
>>
>>
>> Le 03/02/2025 à 15:16, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior a écrit :
>>> Use preempt_model_str() instead of manually conducting the preemption
>>> model. Use pr_emerg() instead of printk() to pass a loglevel.
>>
>> Why use pr_emerg() for that line and not all other ones ?
> 
> checkpatch complained for the current printk() line and this looks like
> an emergency coming from die().

Right but checkpatch only looks at the line you modify with your patch, 
it doesn't consider the global picture.

> 
>> The purpose of using printk() is to get it at the level defined by
>> CONFIG_MESSAGE_LOGLEVEL_DEFAULT and I think it is important to have the full
>> Oops block at the same level.
> 
> Okay. So "printk(KERN_DEFAULT " then.

Up to you, I'm fine with that but you should consistently update all 
printk's in the function, not only that one, so is it really worth it ?

Christophe