netdev - Re: [PATCH RESEND net-next 5/5] net: wwan: core: make debugfs optional

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <ac532d400cd61a0f86ad5b1931df87a83582323c.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Date:   Sun, 28 Nov 2021 18:01:35 +0100
From:   Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:     Sergey Ryazanov <ryazanov.s.a@...il.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, M Chetan Kumar <m.chetan.kumar@...el.com>,
        Intel Corporation <linuxwwan@...el.com>,
        Loic Poulain <loic.poulain@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND net-next 5/5] net: wwan: core: make debugfs
 optional

On Sun, 2021-11-28 at 15:55 +0300, Sergey Ryazanov wrote:
> 
> +config WWAN_DEBUGFS
> +	bool "WWAN subsystem common debugfs interface"
> +	depends on DEBUG_FS
> +	help
> +	  Enables common debugfs infrastructure for WWAN devices.
> +
> +	  If unsure, say N.
> 

I wonder if that really should even say "If unsure, say N." because
really, once you have DEBUG_FS enabled, you can expect things to show up
there?

And I'd probably even argue that it should be

	bool "..." if EXPERT
	default y
	depends on DEBUG_FS

so most people aren't even bothered by the question?


>  config WWAN_HWSIM
>  	tristate "Simulated WWAN device"
>  	help
> @@ -83,6 +91,7 @@ config IOSM
>  config IOSM_DEBUGFS
>  	bool "IOSM Debugfs support"
>  	depends on IOSM && DEBUG_FS
> +	select WWAN_DEBUGFS
> 
I guess it's kind of a philosophical question, but perhaps it would make
more sense for that to be "depends on" (and then you can remove &&
DEBUG_FS"), since that way it becomes trivial to disable all of WWAN
debugfs and not have to worry about individual driver settings?


And after that change, I'd probably just make this one "def_bool y"
instead of asking the user.


johannes