Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.33 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.33;
From:   Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
To:     Ignat Korchagin <ignat@cloudflare.com>, eric.devolder@oracle.com
Cc:     linux@armlinux.org.uk, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org,
        chenhuacai@kernel.org, geert@linux-m68k.org,
        tsbogend@alpha.franken.de,
        James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>,
        deller@gmx.de, ysato@users.sourceforge.jp, dalias@libc.org,
        glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, x86@kernel.org,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org,
        loongarch@lists.linux.dev, linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org,
        linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org,
        linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
        kernel@xen0n.name, npiggin@gmail.com, christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu,
        paul.walmsley@sifive.com, palmer@dabbelt.com,
        aou@eecs.berkeley.edu, hca@linux.ibm.com, gor@linux.ibm.com,
        agordeev@linux.ibm.com, borntraeger@linux.ibm.com,
        svens@linux.ibm.com, hpa@zytor.com, keescook@chromium.org,
        paulmck@kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        frederic@kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>, samitolvanen@google.com,
        juerg.haefliger@canonical.com, arnd@arndb.de,
        rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk, linus.walleij@linaro.org,
        sebastian.reichel@collabora.com, rppt@kernel.org,
        kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com, anshuman.khandual@arm.com,
        ziy@nvidia.com, masahiroy@kernel.org, ndesaulniers@google.com,
        mhiramat@kernel.org, ojeda@kernel.org, thunder.leizhen@huawei.com,
        xin3.li@intel.com, tj@kernel.org,
        Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, tsi@tuyoix.net,
        bhe@redhat.com, hbathini@linux.ibm.com, sourabhjain@linux.ibm.com,
        boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com, konrad.wilk@oracle.com,
        kernel-team <kernel-team@cloudflare.com>
Subject: Re: Potential config regression after 89cde455 ("kexec: consolidate
 kexec and crash options into kernel/Kconfig.kexec")
In-Reply-To: <CALrw=nHpRQQaQTP_jZfREgrQEMpS8jBF8JQCv4ygqXycE-StaA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALrw=nHpRQQaQTP_jZfREgrQEMpS8jBF8JQCv4ygqXycE-StaA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 21 Nov 2023 12:05:59 +1100
Message-ID: <87y1er6hl4.fsf@mail.lhotse>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

Ignat Korchagin <ignat@cloudflare.com> writes:
> Good day!
>
> We have recently started to evaluate Linux 6.6 and noticed that we
> cannot disable CONFIG_KEXEC anymore, but keep CONFIG_CRASH_DUMP
> enabled. It seems to be related to commit 89cde455 ("kexec:
> consolidate kexec and crash options into kernel/Kconfig.kexec"), where
> a CONFIG_KEXEC dependency was added to CONFIG_CRASH_DUMP.
>
> In our current kernel (Linux 6.1) we only enable CONFIG_KEXEC_FILE
> with enforced signature check to support the kernel crash dumping
> functionality and would like to keep CONFIG_KEXEC disabled for
> security reasons [1].
>
> I was reading the long commit message, but the reason for adding
> CONFIG_KEXEC as a dependency for CONFIG_CRASH_DUMP evaded me. And I
> believe from the implementation perspective CONFIG_KEXEC_FILE should
> suffice here (as we successfully used it for crashdumps on Linux 6.1).
>
> Is there a reason for adding this dependency or is it just an
> oversight? Would some solution of requiring either CONFIG_KEXEC or
> CONFIG_KEXEC_FILE work here?

I don't actually see any reason for CRASH_DUMP to depend on KEXEC or
KEXEC_FILE.

None of the old CRASH_DUMP symbols depended on KEXEC AFAICS. Using
something like:

 $ git diff 89cde455..95d1fef5 | grep -A 3 "^-.*config CRASH_DUMP"

It's reasonable to want to build a kernel that supports CRASH_DUMP (ie.
can be a dump kernel), but doesn't support kexec and requires a regular
reboot. Though I doubt anyone does that in practice?

cheers