linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 7/7] Documentation: Add sysfs documentation for PSCRR reboot reason tracking

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: <50205854-b8fc-4022-8a07-ec36d8203f87@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2025 13:27:50 +0200
From: Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@...il.com>
To: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>
Cc: Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
 Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
 Benson Leung <bleung@...omium.org>, Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@...nel.org>,
 Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>, kernel@...gutronix.de,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
 Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
 Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>, Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>,
 linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, Søren Andersen <san@...v.dk>,
 Guenter Roeck <groeck@...omium.org>, Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@...gutronix.de>,
 Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, chrome-platform@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 7/7] Documentation: Add sysfs documentation for PSCRR
 reboot reason tracking

On 18/03/2025 13:24, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 01:17:38PM +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
>> On 18/03/2025 11:47, Oleksij Rempel wrote:

>> A side note which you can consider if you feel like:
>> This, as far as I understand, will also make the ABI out of this. So,
>> perhaps there should be comments in enum psc_reason and the defines in
>> Defined in 'include/linux/reboot.h' that they are part of an ABI, and must
>> not be changed? I suppose user-space tools may get unhappy if these values
>> change between the kernel versions.
> 
> Yes, there is already: "Importantly, the order of these values **must
> remain stable**, as bootloaders, user-space tools, or post-mortem
> investigation utilities may rely on their numerical representation for
> consistent behavior." :)

Just noticed this. My bad, I did reviewing in wrong order :)

>>
>> Reviewed-by: Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@...il.com>
>>
>> Yours,
>> 	-- Matti
>>
>>
>