linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] ftrace: Add 'function-fork' trace option (v1)

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:   Thu, 30 Mar 2017 10:40:46 +0900
From:   Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To:     Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, kernel-team@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] ftrace: Add 'function-fork' trace option (v1)

Hi Masami,

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Mar 2017 10:46:21 +0900
> Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> This patchset add 'function-fork' option to function tracer which
>> makes pid filter to be inherited like 'event-fork' does.  During the
>> test, I found a bug of pid filter on an instance directory.  The patch
>> 1 fixes it and maybe it should go to the stable tree.
>>
>> The function-fork option is disabled by default as event-fork does,
>> but we might consider changing the default since it seems to be more
>> natural from an user's perspective IMHO.
>
> By the way, I thought that event-fork option also effected to
> function tracer. Is there any reason we should separate those?
> I mean, we can add "trace-fork" option instead of "function-fork"
> for setting both pid filters at once.
>
> Thank you,

I'm ok with combining two options.

Thanks
Namhyung