linux-kernel - Re: [2/2] vmallocinfo: Add caller information

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 29 Apr 2008 22:23:02 +0300
From:	"Pekka Enberg" <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
To:	"Christoph Lameter" <clameter@....com>
Cc:	"Arjan van de Ven" <arjan@...radead.org>,
	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Peter Zijlstra" <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [2/2] vmallocinfo: Add caller information

On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 10:09 PM, Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com> wrote:
>  Well so we display out of whack backtraces? There are also issues on
>  platforms that do not have a stack in the classic sense (rotating register
>  file on IA64 and Sparc64 f.e.). Determining a backtrace can be very
>  expensive.

I think that's the key question here whether we need to enable this on
production systems? If yes, why? If it's just a debugging aid, then I
see Ingo's point of save_stack_trace(); otherwise the low-overhead
__builtin_return_address() makes more sense.

And btw, why is this new file not in /sys/kernel....?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/