linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Linux Kernel Markers 0.11 for 2.6.17

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:	Mon, 25 Sep 2006 19:28:28 -0400
From:	Mathieu Desnoyers <compudj@...stal.dyndns.org>
To:	"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>
Cc:	Martin Bligh <mbligh@...gle.com>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
	prasanna@...ibm.com, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jes Sorensen <jes@....com>, Tom Zanussi <zanussi@...ibm.com>,
	Richard J Moore <richardj_moore@...ibm.com>,
	Michel Dagenais <michel.dagenais@...ymtl.ca>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	William Cohen <wcohen@...hat.com>, ltt-dev@...fik.org,
	systemtap@...rces.redhat.com, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	Karim Yaghmour <karim@...rsys.com>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
	"Randy.Dunlap" <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
	"Jose R. Santos" <jrs@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Linux Kernel Markers 0.11 for 2.6.17

Hi,

* Frank Ch. Eigler (fche@...hat.com) wrote:
> Hi -
> 
> > [...]
> > - It _does not_ change the compiler optimisations.
> 
> Like any similar mechanism, it does force the compiler to change its
> code generation, so one can't claim this too strongly.
> 
Yes, memory dependencies are changed, you are right. I was principally talking
about the inline and unrolled loops optimisations.


> > [...]  Comments are welcome,
> 
> I'm still uneasy about the use of varargs.  The current code now uses
> the formatting string as metadata to be matched (strcmp) between
> producer and consumer.  A general tool that would use them would have
> to start parsing general printf directives.

If you want to generate probes automatically, yes.

> I believe they are not
> quite general enough either e.g. to describe a raw binary blob.
> 
If you want to dump a raw binary blob, what about :
MARK(mysubsys_myevent, "char %p %u", blobptr, blobsize);
where %p is a pointer to an array of char and %u the length ?

My idea is to use the string to identify what is referred by a pointer, so it
can be casted into this type with some kind of coherency between the marker and
the probe.

> I realize they serve a useful purpose in abbreviating what otherwise
> one might have to do (like that multiplicity of STAP_MARK_* type/arity
> permutations).  But maybe there is a better way.
> 

I think that duplicating the number of marker macros could easily make
them unflexible and ugly. This is why I am trying to come with this generic
macro.

> Also, while regparm(0) may provide some comfort on x86, is there good
> reason to believe that the same trick works (and will continue to
> work) on non-x86 platforms to invoke a non-varargs callee with a
> varargs caller?
> 

Good point, I will setup a va_args in the probe. When correctly used, however,
there is no need to use the format string : we can directly get the variables
from the var arg list if we know in advance what the string will be.

Mathieu

OpenPGP public key:              http://krystal.dyndns.org:8080/key/compudj.gpg
Key fingerprint:     8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F  BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68 

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (190 bytes)