From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Li Zhong <zhong@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel: Downgrade warning for unsafe parameters
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2018 17:31:32 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87tvu322ej.fsf@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180226151919.9674-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
On Mon, 26 Feb 2018, Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
> As using an unsafe module parameter is, by its very definition, an
> expected user action, emitting a warning is overkill. Nothing has yet
> gone wrong, and we add a taint flag for any future oops should
> something actually go wrong. So instead of having a user controllable
> pr_warn, downgrade it to a pr_notice for "a normal, but significant
> condition".
>
> We make use of unsafe kernel parameters in igt (we have not yet
> succeeded in removing all such debugging options), which generates a
> warning and taints the kernel. The warning is unhelpful as we then need
> to filter it out again as we check that every test themselves do not
> provoke any kernel warnings.
IGT being https://cgit.freedesktop.org/drm/igt-gpu-tools/ for those not
in the DRM/KMS circles.
> References: 91f9d330cc14 ("module: make it possible to have unsafe, tainting module params")
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
> Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> Cc: Li Zhong <zhong@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Cc: Petri Latvala <petri.latvala@intel.com>
> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Acked-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
When I added the unsafe module params, I erred on the side of making
more noise about tainting, but there was really no discussion about
it. FWIW, I don't mind the change, as long as it's not debug level.
BR,
Jani.
> ---
> kernel/params.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/params.c b/kernel/params.c
> index cc9108c2a1fd..ce89f757e6da 100644
> --- a/kernel/params.c
> +++ b/kernel/params.c
> @@ -111,8 +111,8 @@ bool parameq(const char *a, const char *b)
> static void param_check_unsafe(const struct kernel_param *kp)
> {
> if (kp->flags & KERNEL_PARAM_FL_UNSAFE) {
> - pr_warn("Setting dangerous option %s - tainting kernel\n",
> - kp->name);
> + pr_notice("Setting dangerous option %s - tainting kernel\n",
> + kp->name);
> add_taint(TAINT_USER, LOCKDEP_STILL_OK);
> }
> }
--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Li Zhong <zhong@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Petri Latvala <petri.latvala@intel.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel: Downgrade warning for unsafe parameters
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2018 17:31:32 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87tvu322ej.fsf@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180226151919.9674-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
On Mon, 26 Feb 2018, Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
> As using an unsafe module parameter is, by its very definition, an
> expected user action, emitting a warning is overkill. Nothing has yet
> gone wrong, and we add a taint flag for any future oops should
> something actually go wrong. So instead of having a user controllable
> pr_warn, downgrade it to a pr_notice for "a normal, but significant
> condition".
>
> We make use of unsafe kernel parameters in igt (we have not yet
> succeeded in removing all such debugging options), which generates a
> warning and taints the kernel. The warning is unhelpful as we then need
> to filter it out again as we check that every test themselves do not
> provoke any kernel warnings.
IGT being https://cgit.freedesktop.org/drm/igt-gpu-tools/ for those not
in the DRM/KMS circles.
> References: 91f9d330cc14 ("module: make it possible to have unsafe, tainting module params")
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
> Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
> Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> Cc: Li Zhong <zhong@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Cc: Petri Latvala <petri.latvala@intel.com>
> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Acked-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
When I added the unsafe module params, I erred on the side of making
more noise about tainting, but there was really no discussion about
it. FWIW, I don't mind the change, as long as it's not debug level.
BR,
Jani.
> ---
> kernel/params.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/params.c b/kernel/params.c
> index cc9108c2a1fd..ce89f757e6da 100644
> --- a/kernel/params.c
> +++ b/kernel/params.c
> @@ -111,8 +111,8 @@ bool parameq(const char *a, const char *b)
> static void param_check_unsafe(const struct kernel_param *kp)
> {
> if (kp->flags & KERNEL_PARAM_FL_UNSAFE) {
> - pr_warn("Setting dangerous option %s - tainting kernel\n",
> - kp->name);
> + pr_notice("Setting dangerous option %s - tainting kernel\n",
> + kp->name);
> add_taint(TAINT_USER, LOCKDEP_STILL_OK);
> }
> }
--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-02-26 15:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-26 15:19 [PATCH] kernel: Downgrade warning for unsafe parameters Chris Wilson
2018-02-26 15:19 ` Chris Wilson
2018-02-26 15:31 ` Jani Nikula [this message]
2018-02-26 15:31 ` Jani Nikula
2018-02-26 15:41 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for kernel: Downgrade warning for unsafe parameters (rev2) Patchwork
2018-02-26 19:41 ` ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: " Patchwork
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87tvu322ej.fsf@intel.com \
--to=jani.nikula@intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
--cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=khali@linux-fr.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=zhong@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.