From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61128ECDFB0 for ; Sat, 14 Jul 2018 19:06:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14EF020890 for ; Sat, 14 Jul 2018 19:06:32 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 14EF020890 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=xmission.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730930AbeGNTY5 (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Jul 2018 15:24:57 -0400 Received: from out01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.231]:54948 "EHLO out01.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726960AbeGNTY5 (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Jul 2018 15:24:57 -0400 Received: from in01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.51]) by out01.mta.xmission.com with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1fePqg-0000fp-Lw; Sat, 14 Jul 2018 13:04:54 -0600 Received: from [97.119.167.31] (helo=x220.xmission.com) by in01.mta.xmission.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1fePqf-0000Ye-Pz; Sat, 14 Jul 2018 13:04:54 -0600 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Kees Cook Cc: Andrew Morton , Adrian Reber , LKML , Oleg Nesterov , Pavel Emelyanov , Andrei Vagin , Hendrik Brueckner , Cyrill Gorcunov , Linux Containers , Josh Triplett References: <20180712130733.11510-1-adrian@lisas.de> <87sh4o5s82.fsf@xmission.com> <20180713135541.7ada72437862c32f4563a9a8@linux-foundation.org> Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2018 14:04:46 -0500 In-Reply-To: (Kees Cook's message of "Fri, 13 Jul 2018 21:44:15 -0700") Message-ID: <87pnzpvdtd.fsf@xmission.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-XM-SPF: eid=1fePqf-0000Ye-Pz;;;mid=<87pnzpvdtd.fsf@xmission.com>;;;hst=in01.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=97.119.167.31;;;frm=ebiederm@xmission.com;;;spf=neutral X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX1/igUpu2rF7wxN/VXxbqIt8IHPQr6SyJqI= X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 97.119.167.31 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] kconfig: remove EXPERT from CHECKPOINT_RESTORE X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Thu, 05 May 2016 13:38:54 -0600) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in01.mta.xmission.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Kees Cook writes: > On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 1:55 PM, Andrew Morton > wrote: >> On Thu, 12 Jul 2018 11:33:33 -0500 ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) wrote: >>> What is the value of disabling this functionality ever? >>> >>> Is there any reason why we don't just delete CONFIG_CHECKPOINT_RESTORE >>> entirely? >> >> For the vast number of Linux machines which aren't servers? Check out >> some defconfigs - only one of arm's 119 defconfigs selects it. > > Right, and I would bet the minification folks would like to keep it > out of their builds too. I think we should keep the config. I take it then you are volunteering to test with and without the config option? Even if the config option is kept I intend to rip it out every time I wind up touching code with it in. Config options have a real cost in testing and development. For a config option that no one has come forward with an actual real world use case for disabling, that cost seems much too high. Eric