linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] Kernel Tracepoints

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <48656D9A.8000602@redhat.com>
Date:	Fri, 27 Jun 2008 18:45:46 -0400
From:	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com>
To:	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
CC:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Takashi Nishiie <t-nishiie@...css.fujitsu.com>,
	"'Alexey Dobriyan'" <adobriyan@...il.com>,
	"'Peter Zijlstra'" <peterz@...radead.org>,
	"'Steven Rostedt'" <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	"'Frank Ch. Eigler'" <fche@...hat.com>,
	"'Ingo Molnar'" <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"'LKML'" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"'systemtap-ml'" <systemtap@...rces.redhat.com>,
	"'Hideo AOKI'" <haoki@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] Kernel Tracepoints



Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> * Masami Hiramatsu (mhiramat@...hat.com) wrote:
>> Hi Mathieu,
>>
>> Thank you for making this so soon!
>>
> 
> Hi Masami,
> 
> Thanks for the comments, I will rework the patch accordingly.
> 
> Also, one thing I thought about yesterday which I dislike is that if we
> have two modules declaring the same tracepoint in different headers with
> different prototypes, each declaration will be valid but the
> registration will try to connect a probe expecting wrong parameters to
> the other tracepoint.
> 
> It would be the case if someone does :
> 
> drivers/somedrivera/mydriver1-trace.h
> 
> DECLARE_TRACE(really_generic_name, TPPTOTO(void), TPARGS()));
> 
> 
> drivers/somedriverb/mydriver2-trace.h
> 
> DECLARE_TRACE(really_generic_name, TPPTOTO(struct somestruct *s), TPARGS(s)));
> 
> Do you think it's worth it to append the prototype string to the
> tracepoint name ? I think it should fix the problem.

Hmm, I think we'd better send a fix patch to them in that case.
(I hope we can find that kind of conflicts soon)
I think we can make an external tool which detect those conflicts.
Anyway, signature based checking idea is good to me. I think ":" is
better delimiter.


Thank you,


-- 
Masami Hiramatsu

Software Engineer
Hitachi Computer Products (America) Inc.
Software Solutions Division

e-mail: mhiramat@...hat.com

--
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/