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:	Sat, 26 Oct 2013 10:59:55 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	Jovi Zhangwei <jovi.zhangwei@...il.com>
Cc:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"zhangwei(Jovi)" <jovi.zhangwei@...wei.com>,
	Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@...ux.intel.com>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
	David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
Subject: Re: ktap inclusion in drivers/staging/?


* Jovi Zhangwei <jovi.zhangwei@...il.com> wrote:

> Thanks. An addition question I want to discuss in here is the ktap 
> code structure layout in first patch series, this don't need to 
> dig out any ktap design detail, so we can make agreement on this 
> point, and ease for me to prepare patch series.
> 
> Do I need to prepare patchset target on staging tree or "real" 
> part of kernel? [...]

I'd suggest adding it to the core, i.e. kernel/tracing/ and 
kernel/trace/trace_events_filter.c in particular which includes the 
current filter script interpreter.

(Please also make sure that the Lua copyright notices get carried 
over properly.)

> [...] If target on driver/staging/ktap, then kernel code and 
> userspace code still need to locate at same directory, that many 
> people may don't like it.
> 
> Target on "real" part kernel? - include/trace/ktap (header file 
> common used by interpreter and userspace compiler) - 
> kernel/trace/ktap (interpreter code, ktapvm, pure kernel module) - 
> tools/perf/ktap?(userspace compiler code)
>   As I also agree integrating ktap and perf together, two 
>   subsystem can share many codes, so it's better putting ktap 
>   userspace into perf directory.

Once there's a more split-out submission it will be easier to see 
what belongs where. I agree with Pekka that for the user the UI 
should be integrated and obvious.

I'd also like there to be a natural 'extract the script' 
functionality from an installed tap script. This gives more 
flexibiliy and improves security as well: no hidden, binary-only 
crap, every script installed on a running system should be 
extractable in source form, should be reviewable and modifiable.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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