linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ppc64 ftrace: mark data

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, 19 May 2015 13:27:07 +1000
From:	Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
To:	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
Cc:	Torsten Duwe <duwe@....de>,
	ppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ppc64 ftrace: mark data_access callees "notrace" (pt.1)

On Mon, 2015-05-18 at 14:29 +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> yOn Sat, 16 May 2015, Torsten Duwe wrote:
> 
> > > > There's got to be a better solution than this.
> > >
> > > Can you think of a better approach?
> > 
> > Maybe a per thread variable to lock out a recursion into tracing?
> > Thanks for your doubt.
> 
> ftrace already handles recursion protection by itself (depending on the 
> per-ftrace-ops FTRACE_OPS_FL_RECURSION_SAFE flag).

OK, so I wonder why that's not working for us?

> It's however not really well-defined what to do when recursion would 
> happen. Therefore __notrace__ annotation, that just completely avoid such 
> situation by making tracing impossible, looks like saner general solution 
> to me.

I disagree. Correctly annotating all functions that might be called ever and
for all time is a maintenance nightmare and is never going to work in the long
term.

cheers


--
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/