linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv10 2.6.35-rc6-tip 9/14] trace: uprobes trace

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, 2 Aug 2010 09:58:15 +0200
From:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To:	Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Mark Wielaard <mjw@...hat.com>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Naren A Devaiah <naren.devaiah@...ibm.com>,
	Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>,
	Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	2nddept-manager@....hitachi.co.jp
Subject: Re: [PATCHv10 2.6.35-rc6-tip 9/14]  trace: uprobes trace_event
	interface

On Mon, Aug 02, 2010 at 12:16:38PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> > > 
> > > In fact this could be a menu "Dynamic Probes", perhaps default off, inside
> > > which Kprobes and Uprobes would be default on (but depend on "Dynamic Probes").
> > > 
> > > So that you can quickly enable them all in one.
> > 
> > Hmm, I disagree with it, because both Kprobes and Uprobes provides
> > APIs for modules too.
> > 
> > I'd like to suggest below config tree
> > 
> > Kenrel hacking
> >   - Kprobes
> >   - Uprobes
> >   - Tracing
> >      -- Dynamic Events
> >         depends on Kprobes || Uprobes
> > or
> > 	select Kprobes && Uprobes
> 
> I would agree with Masami since there could be people who might be
> apprehensive to try out Uprobes (which would still be experimental) but
> would be interested to use kprobes only since its more mature.
> 
> One change I would suggest would be to select respective events(i.e
> kprobe_event, uprobe_event) instead of kprobes and uprobes.


Yeah sure. The goal was to still have both selectable independently, but
have a menu that can select all in one.

ie:

config DYNAMIC_PROBE
	depends on (KPROBES || UPROBES) && EVENTS_TRACING
	default n

config KPROBES_EVENT:
	depends on DYNAMIC_PROBE && KPROBES
	default y

config UPROBES_EVENT:
	depends on DYNAMIC_PROBE && UPROBES
	default y


So that people who want dynamic probes just don't care and select dynamic probe.
Those who want more granularity can still unselect uprobes events or kprobes
events after that.

--
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/