在 2020年05月26日 21:59, Jiri Bohac 写道: > On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 01:23:51PM +0800, Lianbo Jiang wrote: >> So, here, let's simplify the logic to improve code readability. If the >> KEXEC_SIG_FORCE enabled or kexec lockdown enabled, signature verification >> is mandated. Otherwise, we lift the bar for any kernel image. > > I agree completely; in fact that was my intention when > introducing the code, but I got overruled about the return codes: > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20180119125425.l72meyyc2qtrriwe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > I like this simplification very much, except this part: > >> + if (ret) { >> + pr_debug("kernel signature verification failed (%d).\n", ret); > > ... > >> - pr_notice("kernel signature verification failed (%d).\n", ret); > > I think the log level should stay at most PR_NOTICE when the > verification failure results in rejecting the kernel. Perhaps > even lower. > Thank you for the comment, Jiri Bohac. I like the idea of staying at most PR_NOTICE, but the pr_notice() will output some messages that kernel could want to ignore, such as the case you mentioned below. > In case verification is not enforced and the failure is > ignored, KERN_DEBUG seems reasonable. > Yes, good understanding. It seems that the pr_debug() is still a good option here? Any other thoughts? Thanks. Lianbo > Regards, > _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
