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  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, 12 Oct 2017 21:49:45 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <>
To:     Alexei Starovoitov <>
Cc:     LKML <>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <>,
        Daniel Borkmann <>,
        "David S. Miller" <>,
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing: bpf: Hide bpf trace events when they are not

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 18:38:36 -0700
Alexei Starovoitov <> wrote:

> actually just noticed that xdp tracepoints are not covered by ifdef.
> They depend on bpf_syscall too. So probably makes sense to wrap
> them together.
> bpf tracepoints are not being actively worked on whereas xdp tracepoints
> keep evolving quickly, so the best is probalby to go via net-next
> if you don't mind.

Hmm, they didn't trigger a warning, with the exception of
trace_xdp_redirect_map. I have code to check if tracepoints are used or
not, and it appears that the xdp can be used without BPF_SYSCALL.

I don't think they should be wrapped together until we know why they
are used. I can still take this patch and just not touch the xdp ones.

Note, my kernel was using trace_xdp_redirect_map_err,
trace_xdp_redirect_err, trace_xdp_redirect and trace_xdp_exception.

As they did appear.

-- Steve

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux - Powered by OpenVZ