linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 9/18] 2.6.17.9 perfmon2 patch for review: kernel-level interface

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20060825134704.GA21398@infradead.org>
Date:	Fri, 25 Aug 2006 14:47:04 +0100
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Chuck Ebbert <76306.1226@...puserve.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Stephane Eranian <eranian@....hp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/18] 2.6.17.9 perfmon2 patch for review: kernel-level interface

On Fri, Aug 25, 2006 at 02:56:37AM -0400, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> > Yes, I think we either need a stronger argument for including this code, or
> > we drop it.
> 
> This interface is for people writing kprobes who want to do performance
> monitoring within their probe code.  There will probably never be any
> in-kernel users, just like there are no in-kernel users of kprobes.

Wrong argument.  There is a in-tree user of kprobes and I plan to submit
a lot more.  If people want to write kprobes for performance mintoring
they should submit them for inclusion and we can then find a proper
API for it - the current one is rather horrible anyway.

-
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/