linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Documentation: sysrq: Remove contradicting sentence on extra /proc/sysrq-trigger characters

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: <add429f4-0c22-4228-8cf7-4dfe21630823@infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2025 11:51:49 -0700
From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To: Tomas Mudrunka <tomas.mudrunka@...il.com>, corbet@....net
Cc: bagasdotme@...il.com, cengiz@...nel.wtf, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
 jirislaby@...nel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
 mail@...elmschueler.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: sysrq: Remove contradicting sentence on
 extra /proc/sysrq-trigger characters

Hi,

On 10/16/25 3:17 AM, Tomas Mudrunka wrote:
> Hi. I am author of that sentence and this is NACK from me.
> 
>> I'm not sure this is right - there is a warning here that additional
>> characters may acquire a meaning in the future, so one should not
>> develop the habit of writing them now.
> 
> As you've said... I don't see anything confusing about that.
> The warning was added for a reason, because there was discussion
> about some people writing extra characters in there, which might
> cause issues down the line if we refactor the code in future.

You have already provided a way to write (enter) multiple characters
to /proc/sysrq-trigger. Are you suggesting that someone may come
along and add yet another way to write multiple characters and that
this paragraph is present in case that happens?


>> After all these years, I think
>> the chances of fundamental sysrq changes are pretty small,
> 
> Actualy it is not that long since the underscore mode was added...
> 
>> but I still don't see why we would take the warning out?
> 
> Exactly. Thank you.
> 

-- 
~Randy