<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/">
</head>
<body>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed"
title="RESOLVED NOTABUG - Kernel tainted even when given option is unsupported, with an incorrect taint flag"
href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111918#c6">Comment # 6</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed"
title="RESOLVED NOTABUG - Kernel tainted even when given option is unsupported, with an incorrect taint flag"
href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111918">bug 111918</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:eero.t.tamminen@intel.com" title="Eero Tamminen <eero.t.tamminen@intel.com>"> <span class="fn">Eero Tamminen</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre>(In reply to Joonas Lahtinen from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=111918#c5">comment #5</a>)
<span class="quote">> The solution for the user is simply not to set unsafe kernel options.
> When updating the kernel, the cmdline is kept intact, so when updating
> the kernel the currently inactive unsafe option might become active.
> Taint is supposed to highlight that.</span >
AFAIK taint is mostly supposed to tell upstream kernel maintainers (i.e. other
people than i915 devs & users) whether kernel being run in reported upstream
bugs was trustworthy (is the bug worth debugging etc). Setting taint flag when
that's not the case, defeats this.
(In reply to Daniele Ceraolo Spurio from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=111918#c4">comment #4</a>)
<span class="quote">> add_taint(TAINT_USER, LOCKDEP_STILL_OK);</span >
What about this? TAINT_USER flag is AFAIK intended for the specific use-case of
user-space writing to /proc/sys/kernel/tainted.</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are on the CC list for the bug.</li>
<li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>