Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Tue, 31 Mar 2020 14:31:35 +0000
From:   Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
To:     Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Iurii Zaikin <yzaikin@google.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@kvack.org, Ivan Teterevkov <ivan.teterevkov@nutanix.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        "Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
        "Guilherme G . Piccoli" <gpiccoli@canonical.com>,
        Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] kernel/sysctl: support setting sysctl parameters
 from kernel command line
Message-ID: <20200331143134.GY11244@42.do-not-panic.com>
References: <20200330115535.3215-1-vbabka@suse.cz>
 <20200330115535.3215-2-vbabka@suse.cz>
 <20200330224422.GX11244@42.do-not-panic.com>
 <8146e3d0-89c3-7f79-f786-084c58282c85@suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <8146e3d0-89c3-7f79-f786-084c58282c85@suse.cz>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 09:42:46AM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 3/31/20 12:44 AM, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > 
> > This is wonderful when we think about existing sysctls which have
> > corresponding silly boot params that do the same thing. However, shoving
> > a boot param capability down every possible built-in sysctl brings
> > forward support considerations we should take serious, as this would
> > add a new user interface and we'll have to support it.
> 
> Hmm, if I boot with an initramfs with init process that does mount /proc and set
> some sysctl there as the very first thing, then this will be almost the same
> moment as my patch does it. There is no further kernel initialization in
> between. So with your logic we already do support all non-modular sysctls to be
> set so early.

Yes, true. Then by all means:

Reviewed-by: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>

  Luis