Re: i386-show-unhandled-signals-v3

["Masoud Sharbiani" <masouds@google.com>]

On 7/25/07, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:40:06 -0700
> masouds@google.com (Masoud Asgharifard Sharbiani) wrote:
>
> > > Look: if there's a way in which an unprivileged user can trigger a printk
> > > we fix it, end of story.  I don't know why this even slightly
> > > controversial.
> > >
> >
> > Fair enough. Here it is:
>
> My favourite words.
>
> > ---------------
> > Hello,
> > This patch makes the i386 behave the same way that x86_64 does when a
> > segfault happens. A line gets printed to the kernel log so that tools
> > that need to check for failures can behave more uniformly between
> > different kernels. Like x86_64, it can be disabled by setting
> > debug.show_unhandled_signals sysctl variable to 0 (or by doing
> > echo 0 > /proc/sys/debug/show_unhandled_signals)
>
> Do we really need the ratelimiting?  If the admin turns this on then he's
> presumably prepared for the consequences.
>
> I guess "yes", as people (even distros) are likely to turn this on and
> forget about it.
>
> The patch is larger than I expected, ho hum.

So, we happy? What else I can chop from this patch to make it more
acceptable for the people involved?
Please be advised that with this patch, the old exception_trace that
was enabled becomes disabled by default; x86_64 had that enabled, and
i386 didn't have anything...
cheers,
Masoud
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/