linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] printk_legacy_map: use LD_WAIT_CONFIG instead of LD_WAIT

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: <20251023191442.Uu0mD_Nq@linutronix.de>
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2025 21:14:42 +0200
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] printk_legacy_map: use LD_WAIT_CONFIG instead of
 LD_WAIT_SLEEP

On 2025-10-23 17:46:58 [+0200], Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Again, quite possibly I am wrong. please see my reply in another thread,
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20251023152942.GC26461@redhat.com/
> 
> On 10/23, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> >
> > This does not matter. My point is that there no need for this ifdefery.
> 
> I disagree. Rightly or not. To me this ifdefery in printk.c make the intent
> more clear.
> 
> I am still thinking about the possible cleanup of the current usage of
> DEFINE_WAIT_OVERRIDE_MAP(), but I think that, whatever we do, this cleanup
> should take CONFIG_RT into account.

Right. Please just do s/SLEEP/CONFIG as discussed. Please leave
PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING out of it while arguing why this change is
correct.

> Oleg.

Sebastian