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:	Mon, 14 Jul 2008 12:26:31 -0400
From:	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com>
To:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
CC:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>, "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	systemtap@...rceware.org,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] simple dprobe like markers for the kernel

Hi James,

James Bottomley wrote:
> This is just an incremental update based on feedback.  The most
> significant was that making the marker a compiler barrier will free the
> inserter from worrying about the mark sliding around changes to named
> variables (and thus having to worry about this in placement) at
> practically zero optimisation cost.  I also updated the code to drop and
> asm section instead of using the static variable scheme.  I also added
> documentation and made the module loader ignore them (since modules
> don't go through the vmlinux.lds transformations).

I'm very interested in your approach.

IMHO, as Aoki investigated, the overhead of markers is not so big
unless we put a lot of them into kernel. And from "active"
overhead point of view, it takes less than tens of nano-seconds,
while kprobes takes hundreds of nano-seconds. Kprobe also has a
limitation of probable points, it can't probe "__kprobes" marked
functions. So, original markers still has advantages.

However, your approach is also useful, especially for embedding
thousands of markers in kernel or drivers.

So I think it's better to use both of them as the situation demands.

I just have one comment on its name. Since it doesn't trace
anything, so I'd rather like notation() or note_mark() than
trace_simple(). :-)

Thank you,

> 
> I also added a simple versioning scheme (basically tack the version on
> to the end of the section name).  It can be used simply and even
> provides backwards compatibility (just emit the old and the new
> sections).
> 
> If everyone's happy with this, I'll follow it up with the systemtap
> changes to make use of them ... they've been incredibly helpful
> debugging some of the CDROM problems for me so far.
> 
> James

-- 
Masami Hiramatsu

Software Engineer
Hitachi Computer Products (America) Inc.
Software Solutions Division

e-mail: mhiramat@...hat.com

--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ