On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 04:37:13PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 07:31:36AM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: > > The only question is whether we want to preserve _some_ kind of warning > > there, or just axe it entirely. > > Right, my fear would be if we keep it, then we'd have to go and > whitelist or somehow track those users which are an exception... > > OTOH, it might be prudent to have a warning to catch such abnormal > situations...
But a warn like that on the kexec/kdump path can be scary for regular / unware users, specially considering that kexec is almost common place for regular reboot. > > -- > Regards/Gruss, > Boris. > > Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply. > -- All the best, Eduardo Valentin
