linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] vt: Add enable module parameter

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: <2026012613-cotton-jellied-b67a@gregkh>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2026 10:33:08 +0100
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Jocelyn Falempe <jfalempe@...hat.com>
Cc: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>, Nicolas Pitre <npitre@...libre.com>,
	Calixte Pernot <calixte.pernot@...noble-inp.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vt: Add enable module parameter

On Mon, Jan 26, 2026 at 10:21:50AM +0100, Jocelyn Falempe wrote:
> This allows to build the kernel with CONFIG_VT enabled, and choose
> on the kernel command line to enable it or not.

This says what is happening, but not why?

> Add vt.enable=1 to force enable, or vt.enable=0 to force disable.

Why are we using a 1990's technology for a new feature?  What is this
going to allow to have happen?  Who needs/wants this?  Who will use it?
For what?

> Signed-off-by: Jocelyn Falempe <jfalempe@...hat.com>
> ---
>  drivers/tty/Kconfig | 13 +++++++++++++
>  drivers/tty/vt/vt.c |  5 +++++
>  2 files changed, 18 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/tty/Kconfig b/drivers/tty/Kconfig
> index 149f3d53b7608..2b94c2710687a 100644
> --- a/drivers/tty/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/tty/Kconfig
> @@ -41,6 +41,19 @@ config VT
>  	  If unsure, say Y, or else you won't be able to do much with your new
>  	  shiny Linux system :-)
>  
> +config VT_ENABLE
> +	depends on VT
> +	default y
> +	bool "enable VT terminal" if EXPERT

So no one will ever really use this config option?

And you are doing 2 things in this patch, not just one, unlike what the
changelog said :(

thanks,

greg k-h