On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 05:29:21AM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>
> On Wednesday 2012-10-03 18:17, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> >>
> >> OK, I will bite... How should I flag an option that is initially only
> >> intended for those willing to take some level of risk?
> >
> >In the text say "You rea
On Wednesday 2012-10-03 18:17, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>
>> OK, I will bite... How should I flag an option that is initially only
>> intended for those willing to take some level of risk?
>
>In the text say "You really don't want to enable this option, use at
>your own risk!" Or something li
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 7:47 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Kees,
>
> On Mon, 8 Oct 2012 18:57:51 -0700 Kees Cook wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 6:20 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 05:46:08PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> >> On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Greg
Hi Kees,
On Mon, 8 Oct 2012 18:57:51 -0700 Kees Cook wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 6:20 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 05:46:08PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> >> On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 03:08:40P
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 6:26 PM, Paul E. McKenney
wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 05:46:08PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 03:08:40PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 9:17 AM, Greg Kroah-Har
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 05:46:08PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 03:08:40PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> >> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 9:17 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 06:25:38AM -07
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 05:46:08PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> >> Who is going to carry this initial patch, btw?
> >
> > You? :)
>
> Do you mean to say I should ask Stephen to pull from one of my trees
> for linux-next? If so, I've made this now:
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/k
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 03:08:40PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 9:17 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
>> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 06:25:38AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> >> On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 12:50:42PM -0
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 03:08:40PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 9:17 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 06:25:38AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >> On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 12:50:42PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> >> > This config item has not carried muc
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Paul E. McKenney
wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 03:40:57PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
>> > On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Paul E. McKenney
>> > wrote:
>> >> On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 03:07:24PM -0700, Kees Cook wro
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 03:40:57PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Paul E. McKenney
> > wrote:
> >> On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 03:07:24PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> >>> On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 6:04 PM, Paul E. McKenney
> >>
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Paul E. McKenney
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 03:07:24PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>>> On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 6:04 PM, Paul E. McKenney
>>> wrote:
>>> > On Sun, Oct 07, 2012 at 04:18:54PM -0400, Dave Jones wr
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Paul E. McKenney
wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 03:07:24PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 6:04 PM, Paul E. McKenney
>> wrote:
>> > On Sun, Oct 07, 2012 at 04:18:54PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
>> >> On Sun, Oct 07, 2012 at 09:30:29AM -0700, Paul
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 03:07:24PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 6:04 PM, Paul E. McKenney
> wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 07, 2012 at 04:18:54PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> >> On Sun, Oct 07, 2012 at 09:30:29AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >>
> >> > > I think Kconfig is mostly wha
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 9:17 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 06:25:38AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 12:50:42PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> > This config item has not carried much meaning for a while now and is
>> > almost always enabled by defaul
On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 6:04 PM, Paul E. McKenney
wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 07, 2012 at 04:18:54PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 07, 2012 at 09:30:29AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>>
>> > > I think Kconfig is mostly what distro would like to use the thing is
>> > > the Kconfig text needs
On Sun, Oct 07, 2012 at 04:18:54PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 07, 2012 at 09:30:29AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > > I think Kconfig is mostly what distro would like to use the thing is
> > > the Kconfig text needs to be there upfront when its merged, not two
> > > months lat
On Sun, Oct 07, 2012 at 09:30:29AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > I think Kconfig is mostly what distro would like to use the thing is
> > the Kconfig text needs to be there upfront when its merged, not two
> > months later, since then it too late for a distro to notice.
> >
> > I'd bet
On Sun, Oct 07, 2012 at 12:33:48PM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
> >>
> >> Really I would much prefer to add some "Don't enable it unless you're
> >> doing kernel hacking.
> >> If unsure say N" text in the Kconfig.
> >>
> >> I can understand that distros want to cover as much feature as they
> >> can f
>>
>> Really I would much prefer to add some "Don't enable it unless you're
>> doing kernel hacking.
>> If unsure say N" text in the Kconfig.
>>
>> I can understand that distros want to cover as much feature as they
>> can for their users. But
>> should it be an excuse for not reading outstanding w
On Sat, Oct 06, 2012 at 06:10:36PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 2012/10/5 Paul E. McKenney :
> > On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 07:31:50AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >> On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 02:55:39AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >> > On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 01:03:14PM -0700, Paul E. Mc
2012/10/5 Paul E. McKenney :
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 07:31:50AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 02:55:39AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> > On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 01:03:14PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> >
>> > > That has not proven sufficient for me in the past,
On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 07:31:50AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 02:55:39AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 01:03:14PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >
> > > That has not proven sufficient for me in the past, RCU_FAST_NO_HZ
> > > being a case
On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 02:55:39AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 01:03:14PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > That has not proven sufficient for me in the past, RCU_FAST_NO_HZ
> > being a case in point.
>
> Taint the kernel at boot time? That'd be sufficient to force
On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 11:43:37PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 03:36:53PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 07:46:18PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > > it in the kernel tree, unless we wanted people to use the option?
> > >
> > > A sol
On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 01:03:14PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> That has not proven sufficient for me in the past, RCU_FAST_NO_HZ
> being a case in point.
Taint the kernel at boot time? That'd be sufficient to force distros to
disable it.
--
Matthew Garrett | mj...@srcf.ucam.org
--
To unsu
On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 03:23:27PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> "Paul E. McKenney" writes:
>
> > On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 11:43:32AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> >> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 9:47 AM, Paul E. McKenney
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 09:17:02AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman w
"Paul E. McKenney" writes:
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 11:43:32AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 9:47 AM, Paul E. McKenney
>> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 09:17:02AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 06:25:38AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 03:36:53PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 07:46:18PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > it in the kernel tree, unless we wanted people to use the option?
> >
> > A solution could be to add that option under CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL and
> specify
> >
On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 11:43:32AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> I would expect a simple addition of "this is dangerous/buggy" to the
> description and "default n" is likely the way to go for that kind of
> thing.
Agreed.
> I think the history of CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL has proven there
> isn't a sensibl
On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 11:43:32AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 9:47 AM, Paul E. McKenney
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 09:17:02AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> >> On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 06:25:38AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 12:50
On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 03:36:53PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 07:46:18PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > it in the kernel tree, unless we wanted people to use the option?
> >
> > A solution could be to add that option under CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL and
> specify
> >
On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 07:46:18PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > it in the kernel tree, unless we wanted people to use the option?
>
> A solution could be to add that option under CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL and specify
> that it must only be enabled by developers for specific reasons (overhea
On Wed, 3 Oct 2012, Kees Cook wrote:
OK, I will bite... How should I flag an option that is initially only
intended for those willing to take some level of risk?
In the text say "You really don't want to enable this option, use at
your own risk!" Or something like that :)
OK, so the only r
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 9:47 AM, Paul E. McKenney
wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 09:17:02AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 06:25:38AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> > On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 12:50:42PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> > > This config item has not carried
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 10:21:42AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 09:47:12AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> > On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 09:17:02AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> > > On Wed, Oct 03, 2012
Quoting Paul E. McKenney (paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com):
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 10:21:42AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 09:47:12AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 09:17:02AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 a
On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 10:21:42AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 09:47:12AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 09:17:02AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 06:25:38AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Oct
On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 10:21:42AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 09:47:12AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 09:17:02AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 06:25:38AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Oct
On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 09:47:12AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 09:17:02AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 06:25:38AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 12:50:42PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > > > This config item has
On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 09:17:02AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 06:25:38AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 12:50:42PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > > This config item has not carried much meaning for a while now and is
> > > almost always enabl
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 6:25 AM, Paul E. McKenney
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 12:50:42PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>>> This config item has not carried much meaning for a while now and is
>>> almost always enabled by default. As agreed duri
On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 06:25:38AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 12:50:42PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > This config item has not carried much meaning for a while now and is
> > almost always enabled by default. As agreed during the Linux kernel
> > summit, it should be re
Quoting Paul E. McKenney (paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com):
> On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 12:50:42PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > This config item has not carried much meaning for a while now and is
> > almost always enabled by default. As agreed during the Linux kernel
> > summit, it should be removed. As a
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 6:25 AM, Paul E. McKenney
wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 12:50:42PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> This config item has not carried much meaning for a while now and is
>> almost always enabled by default. As agreed during the Linux kernel
>> summit, it should be removed. As a
On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 12:50:42PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> This config item has not carried much meaning for a while now and is
> almost always enabled by default. As agreed during the Linux kernel
> summit, it should be removed. As a first step, remove it from being
> listed, and default it to o
Quoting Kees Cook (keesc...@chromium.org):
> This config item has not carried much meaning for a while now and is
> almost always enabled by default. As agreed during the Linux kernel
> summit,
Didn't this suggestion first come up around 2007 or so? :)
> it should be removed. As a first step, re
This config item has not carried much meaning for a while now and is
almost always enabled by default. As agreed during the Linux kernel
summit, it should be removed. As a first step, remove it from being
listed, and default it to on. Once it has been removed from all
subsystem Kconfigs, it will be
48 matches
Mail list logo
