On Thu, 13 Jun 2024 at 15:26, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, 13 Jun 2024 08:11:48 +0200 > Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > I've added one more comment to v5, with that fixed I can take this. > > > > > > > So how is this supposed to work wrt to the rigid 'no user visible > > regressions' rule, given that this whole thing is a best effort thing > > This has nothing to do with user space. The kernel command line has > broken in the past. If you update the kernel, you can update the > command line. There's no "no user visible regressions" rule. It's > "Don't break user space". This has nothing to do with user space. > > > to begin with. This needs at least a huge disclaimer that this rule > > does not apply, and if this works today, there is no guarantee that it > > will keep working on newer kernels. Otherwise, you will be making the > > job of the people who work on the boot code significantly more > > difficult. And even then, I wonder whether Linus and #regzcop are > > going to honour such a disclaimer. > > Again, this has nothing to do with user space. The rule Linus talks > about is breaking user space. This is about kernel debugging. Something > *completely different*! > > > > > So this belongs downstream, unless some guarantees can be provided > > that this functionality is exempt from the usual regression policies. > > I disagree. kexec/kdump also has the same issues. > Fair enough. As long as it is documented that there is no guarantee that this will keep working over a kernel upgrade, then I have no objections.
