From: Jinchao Wang <wangjinchao600@gmail.com>
To: Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@kernel.org>,
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@suse.com>,
Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>,
linux-modules@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] module: signing: Use pr_err for signature rejection
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2025 09:57:52 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <80cee152-a9b0-431c-bfe4-333c28f83c02@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <156fa755-6937-4df1-b995-99a2cc4bbb0a@kernel.org>
On 9/2/25 02:18, Daniel Gomez wrote:
> On 29/08/2025 10.49, Jinchao Wang wrote:
>> Make module signature rejection messages more visible by using pr_err
>> instead of pr_notice.
>
> Can you elaborate a bit more? Why is this needed?
>
> IMO, I don't think making it more visible is enough rational to increase the
> level.
Thank you for the feedback.
When using dmesg, pr_err is displayed in red, pr_warn in yellow, and
pr_notice/pr_info in the default color. This makes pr_err more visible
to users.
In the kernel tree, there are around 4161 pr_err calls across 20000
files, compared to 276 pr_notice calls across 827 files. From reviewing
them, pr_notice is typically used in default or informational branches,
while pr_err is mostly used in error paths.
Since this rejection path returns -EKEYREJECTED and prevents the
operation from proceeding, it aligns more closely with other uses of
pr_err than with pr_notice. For these reasons, I believe pr_err is the
appropriate choice here.
--
Best regards,
Jinchao
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-02 1:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-08-29 8:49 [PATCH v3 0/4] module: logging and code improvements Jinchao Wang
2025-08-29 8:49 ` [PATCH v3 1/4] module: signing: Use pr_err for signature rejection Jinchao Wang
2025-09-01 9:25 ` Petr Pavlu
2025-09-01 18:18 ` Daniel Gomez
2025-09-02 1:57 ` Jinchao Wang [this message]
2025-08-29 8:49 ` [PATCH v3 2/4] module: show why force load fails Jinchao Wang
2025-09-01 9:26 ` Petr Pavlu
2025-09-01 18:29 ` Daniel Gomez
2025-09-02 2:06 ` Jinchao Wang
2025-08-29 8:49 ` [PATCH v3 3/4] module: centralize no-versions force load check Jinchao Wang
2025-09-01 9:30 ` Petr Pavlu
2025-08-29 8:49 ` [PATCH v3 4/4] module: separate vermagic and livepatch checks Jinchao Wang
2025-09-01 9:34 ` Petr Pavlu
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=80cee152-a9b0-431c-bfe4-333c28f83c02@gmail.com \
--to=wangjinchao600@gmail.com \
--cc=da.gomez@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-modules@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=petr.pavlu@suse.com \
--cc=samitolvanen@google.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).