On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 06:05:27PM -0400, Qian Cai wrote: > > > > On May 7, 2020, at 4:42 PM, Rafael Aquini <aquini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Wed, May 06, 2020 at 10:50:19PM -0400, Qian Cai wrote: > >> > >> > >>> On May 6, 2020, at 6:28 PM, Rafael Aquini <aquini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> > >>> Analogously to the introduction of panic_on_warn, this patch > >>> introduces a kernel option named panic_on_taint in order to > >>> provide a simple and generic way to stop execution and catch > >>> a coredump when the kernel gets tainted by any given taint flag. > >>> > >>> This is useful for debugging sessions as it avoids rebuilding > >>> the kernel to explicitly add calls to panic() or BUG() into > >>> code sites that introduce the taint flags of interest. > >>> Another, perhaps less frequent, use for this option would be > >>> as a mean for assuring a security policy (in paranoid mode) > >>> case where no single taint is allowed for the running system. > >> > >> Andrew, you can drop the patch below from -mm now because that one is now obsolete, > >> > >> mm-slub-add-panic_on_error-to-the-debug-facilities.patch > >> > > Please, don't drop it yet. I'll send a patch to get rid of the bits, > > once this one gets accepted, if it gets accepted. > > Why do you ever want that obsolete patch even show up in linux-next to potentailly waste other people/bots time to test it and develop things on top of it? > It's a reasonable and self-contained feature that we have a valid use for. I honestly fail to see it causing that amount of annoyance as you are suggesting here. _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
