linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] New message-logging API (kprint)

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:	Fri, 5 Oct 2007 15:13:09 +0200
From:	"Vegard Nossum" <vegard.nossum@...il.com>
To:	"Rob Landley" <rob@...dley.net>
Cc:	"Randy Dunlap" <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Kyle Moffett" <mrmacman_g4@....com>,
	"Michael Holzheu" <holzheu@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"Joe Perches" <joe@...ches.com>,
	"Dick Streefland" <dick.streefland@...ium.nl>,
	"Geert Uytterhoeven" <Geert.Uytterhoeven@...ycom.com>,
	"Jesse Barnes" <jesse.barnes@...el.com>,
	"Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>,
	"Jan Engelhardt" <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>,
	"Emil Medve" <Emilian.Medve@...escale.com>,
	"Stephen Hemminger" <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"linux@...izon.com" <linux@...izon.com>,
	"Miguel Ojeda" <maxextreme@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] New message-logging API (kprint)

On 10/5/07, Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net> wrote:
> On Thursday 04 October 2007 3:17:03 pm Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 22:04:07 +0200 Vegard Nossum wrote:
> > > Description: This patch largely implements the kprint API as previously
> > > posted to the LKML and described in Documentation/kprint.txt (see patch).
> > >
> > > The main purpose of this change is provide a unified logging API to the
> > > kernel and at the same time make it easy to add extensions, now and
> > > later.
> > >
> > > My changes and additions are as follows:
> >
> > $ diffstat -p1 -w70 kprint.patch
> ...
> >  40 files changed, 1660 insertions(+), 72 deletions(-)
>
> I started this thread by posting an idea I had for shrinking the kernel by
> allowing more code to be configured out.  The API change was exactly one new
> parameter, with a direct 1->1 mapping from the old API to the new one, which
> was trivial to convert and which the compiler would catch if you missed one.
>
> The result of the discussion is a patch adding 1600 lines to the kernel,
> without removing anything.

Of course. If you look at the diffstat, as kindly posted by Randy,
you'll notice that about 500-600 of those lines are documentation,
configuration files, and headers.

What's really a concern (and a valid argument) is the overhead
introduced for each call to printk(); the defconfig kernel on x86
increases with about 210K. I will try to improve this.

> Last I checked, the current prink() worked just fine.  Why is this _not_ the
> dreaded "infrastructure in search of a use"?  What exactly can we _not_ do
> with the current code?  What does this allow us to remove and simplify?

With the current code, localisation is not possible to do in a sane
way. My change is a "catch all" in desired features -- not just
removing some unwanted printks.


Vegard
-
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/