linux-kernel - Re: System call instrumentation

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, 5 May 2008 13:10:29 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, systemtap@...rces.redhat.com,
	"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: System call instrumentation


* Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca> wrote:

> > hm, i'm not sure about this. I've implemented system call tracing in 
> > -rt [embedded in the latency tracer] and it only needed changes in 
> > entry.S, not in every system call site. Now, granted, that tracer 
> > was simpler than what LTTng tries to do, but do we _really_ need 
> > more complexity? A trace point that simply expresses:
> > 
> >    sys_call_event(int sysno, long param1, long param2, long param3,
> >                              long param4, long param5, long param6);
> > 
> 
> That would work for all system calls that doesn't have parameters like 
> "const char __user *filename".

what's the problem with them? Do you want to follow those parameters?

	Ingo
--
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/