linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/05] Linux Kernel Markers

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]

Message-ID: <20070215223037.GA6297@Krystal>
Date:	Thu, 15 Feb 2007 17:30:37 -0500
From:	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, systemtap@...rces.redhat.com,
	ltt-dev@...fik.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/05] Linux Kernel Markers - kernel 2.6.20

* Andrew Morton (akpm@...ux-foundation.org) wrote:
> On 15 Feb 2007 10:28:57 -0500
> fche@...hat.com (Frank Ch. Eigler) wrote:
> 
> > 
> > akpm wrote:
> > 
> > > [...]  And what can I do with these markers?  And once I've done it,
> > > are there any userspace applications I can use to get the data out
> > > in human-usable form?  [...]
> > 
> > The LTTng user-space programs use it today.  Systemtap used to support
> > the earlier marker prototype and will be rapidly ported over to this
> > new API upon acceptance.
> > 
> 
> That's good.
> 
> It would be beneficial if some people from those projects could spare the
> cycles to carefully review and runtime test this code.
> 
LTTng is using the marker infrastructure since last november. Me and my
users have been very happy with it.

> Also, I'm not 100% clear on where we ended up with the huge
> static-vs-dynamic flamewar.  Did everyone end up happy?  Is this patchset a
> reasonable compromise?  Or do we need a rematch?

I think the final agreement was the need for some kind of code marking
system, which I tried to implement as best as I could. It gives very
good performances while tracing (advantage of static tracing), has a
very very minimal performance and binary size impact when disabled
(advantage of dynamic tracing) and it can be activated dynamically
(advantage of dynamic tracing).

Mathieu

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
Computer Engineering Ph.D. Candidate, École Polytechnique de Montréal
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F  BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
-
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/