On Mon, 15 Nov 2021 14:59:57 +0100 Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 1. Allow a reasonably configured kernel to boot and run with > panic_on_warn set. Warnings should only be raised when something is > not configured as the developers expect it or the kernel is put into a > state that generally is _unexpected_ and has been exposed little to > the critical thought of the developer, to testing efforts and use in > other systems in the wild. Warnings should not be used for something > informative, which still allows the kernel to continue running in a > proper way in a generally expected environment. Up to my knowledge, > there are some kernels in production that run with panic_on_warn; so, > IMHO, this requirement is generally accepted (we might of course To me, WARN*() is the same as BUG*(). If it gets hit, it's a bug in the kernel and needs to be fixed. I have several WARN*() calls in my code, and it's all because the algorithms used is expected to prevent the condition in the warning from happening. If the warning triggers, it means either that the algorithm is wrong or my assumption about the algorithm is wrong. In either case, the kernel needs to be updated. All my tests fail if a WARN*() gets hit (anywhere in the kernel, not just my own). After reading all the replies and thinking about this more, I find the pkill_on_warning actually worse than not doing anything. If you are concerned about exploits from warnings, the only real solution is a panic_on_warning. Yes, it brings down the system, but really, it has to be brought down anyway, because it is in need of a kernel update. -- Steve
