Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.80.23.2.2\))
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel: add panic_on_taint
From:   Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>
In-Reply-To: <20200507233634.GA367616@optiplex-lnx>
Date:   Thu, 7 May 2020 20:28:40 -0400
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
        kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        dyoung@redhat.com, Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <438575BA-00CA-44BF-8C4C-693DCC00FDD1@lca.pw>
References: <20200507221503.GL205881@optiplex-lnx>
 <6B423101-ACF4-49A3-AD53-ACBF87F1ABE0@lca.pw>
 <20200507233634.GA367616@optiplex-lnx>
To:     Rafael Aquini <aquini@redhat.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


> On May 7, 2020, at 7:36 PM, Rafael Aquini <aquini@redhat.com> wrote:
>=20
> On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 07:07:20PM -0400, Qian Cai wrote:
>>=20
>>=20
>>> On May 7, 2020, at 6:15 PM, Rafael Aquini <aquini@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>=20
>>> It's a reasonable and self-contained feature that we have a valid =
use for.=20
>>> I honestly fail to see it causing that amount of annoyance as you =
are=20
>>> suggesting here.
>>=20
>> It is not a big trouble yet, but keeping an obsolete patch that not =
very straightforward to figure out that it will be superseded by the =
panic_on_taint patch will only cause more confusion the longer it has =
stayed in linux-next.
>>=20
>> The thing is that even if you can=E2=80=99t get this panic_on_taint =
(the superior solution) patch accepted for some reasons, someone else =
could still work on it until it get merged.
>>=20
>> Thus, I failed to see any possibility we will go back to the inferior =
solution (mm-slub-add-panic_on_error-to-the-debug-facilities.patch) by =
all means.
>>=20
>=20
> There are plenty of examples of things being added, changed, and
> removed in -next. IOW, living in a transient state. I think it's=20
> a reasonable compromise to keep it while the other one is beind=20
> ironed out.
>=20
> The fact that you prefer one solution to another doesn't
> invalidate the one you dislike.=20

As far I can tell, the bar of the other core subsystems are quite high =
even for linux-next. People have been voiced over and over again to urge =
Andrew not picking up patches so eagerly, but I will save that =
discussion for the next time.

Anyway, thanks for working for the panic_on_taint patch. I believe it =
could be useful for all testing agents to catch those bad pages earlier.=