On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 09:25:11AM -0400, Qian Cai wrote:
> On Thu, 2019-06-27 at 15:03 +0200, Alexander Potapenko wrote:
> > +static int __init early_init_on_alloc(char *buf)
> > +{
> > + int ret;
> > + bool bool_result;
> > +
> > + if (!buf)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + ret = kstrtobool(buf, &bool_result);
> > + if (bool_result && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PAGE_POISONING))
> > + pr_warn("mem auto-init: CONFIG_PAGE_POISONING is on, will
> > take precedence over init_on_alloc\n");
>
> I don't like the warning here. It makes people think it is bug that need to be
> fixed, but actually it is just information. People could enable both in a debug
> kernel.
How would you suggest it be adjusted? Should it be silent, or be
switched to pr_info()?
Also, doesn't this need to check "want_page_poisoning", not just
CONFIG_PAGE_POISONING? Perhaps just leave the warning out entirely?
--
Kees Cook
