From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751196AbaJOFqS (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Oct 2014 01:46:18 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-f182.google.com ([209.85.212.182]:62888 "EHLO mail-wi0-f182.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750737AbaJOFqR (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Oct 2014 01:46:17 -0400 Message-ID: <543E0A25.80401@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 22:46:13 -0700 From: Frank Rowand Reply-To: frowand.list@gmail.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andy Lutomirski CC: Andrew Morton , Josh Triplett , Rob Landley , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Chuck Ebbert , Randy Dunlap , Shuah Khan Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] init: Disable defaults if init= fails References: <5c6381879bea68aebb13530442f1cf8a052be97f.1411958379.git.luto@amacapital.net> <542B4DA3.5080105@gmail.com> <542B519B.6010001@landley.net> <542B5E44.40303@gmail.com> <542B7200.6030902@landley.net> <20141001180510.GA28540@cloud> <20141014140052.2f114c158ffe6cd953020f1c@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/14/2014 2:21 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 2:00 PM, Andrew Morton > wrote: >> On Wed, 1 Oct 2014 11:13:14 -0700 Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 11:05 AM, wrote: >>>> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 09:53:56PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >>>>> I significantly prefer default N. Scripts that play with init= really >>>>> don't want the fallback, and I can imagine contexts in which it could >>>>> be a security problem. >>>> >>>> While I certainly would prefer the non-fallback behavior for init as >>>> well, standard kernel practice has typically been to use "default y" for >>>> previously built-in features that become configurable. And I'd >>>> certainly prefer a compile-time configuration option like this (even >>>> with default y) over a "strictinit" kernel command-line option. >>>> >>> >>> Fair enough. >>> >>> So: "default y" for a release or two, then switch the default? Having >>> default y will annoy virtme, though it's not the end of the world. >>> Virtme is intended to work with more-or-less-normal kernels. >>> >> >> Adding another Kconfig option is tiresome. What was wrong with strictinit=? > > The consensus seems to be that adding a non-default option to get ^^^^^^^^^ I do not think you know what the word consensus means. :-) I did not agree. I do agree with Andrew (but with no opinion on whether "strictinit=SOMETHING" or just "strictinit". > sensible behavior would be unfortunate. Also, I don't like ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ behavior that is useful in some or many contexts > strictinit=, since backwards-compatible setups will have to do > init=foo strictinit=foo. My original proposal was init=foo > strictinit. > > TBH, my preference would be to make strict mode unconditional. > http://xkcd.com/1172/ > > --Andy >