On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 11:27:20PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 05:15:00PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: > > Do we want to show all the rejection messages from bzImage64 and > > bzImage32 loaders. It might be too verbose to show users that before > > vmlinux loader accepted the image other loaders on this arches rejcted > > the image. > > I get all that. But, if people want to get feedback from the system > about *why* their image didn't load, they absolutely have to enable > dynamic debug. And this is not optimal IMO because they will have to > look at the code first to see what they need to do. > > Or is kexec-tools going to be taught to interpret return values from the > syscall? In most of the cases return code is -ENOEXEC so kexec-tools can't figure out what's wrong. > > In any case, we want information about why an image fails loading to > reach the user in the easiest way possible. And why should the user need > to enable dynamic debug if he can get the info without doing so? > > Oh, and not everyone knows about dynamic debug so... > > And I don't think it'll be too much info - only the line which fails > the check will be printed before the image loader fails so that's > practically one error reason per failed image. > Ok, there will be one line of error and that's not too bad. I will convert these pr_debug() statements in bzImage_probe() to pr_err(). Thanks Vivek
