linux-kernel - Re: [patch 4/4] KVM-trace port to 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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20080723132024.GC15401@Krystal>
Date:	Wed, 23 Jul 2008 09:20:24 -0400
From:	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
To:	Avi Kivity <avi@...ranet.com>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kvm@...r.kernel.org, "Feng(Eric) Liu" <eric.e.liu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 4/4] KVM-trace port to tracepoints

* Avi Kivity (avi@...ranet.com) wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Tue, 2008-07-22 at 21:46 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>   
>>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>     
>>>> That's true - as long as you don't have to add/remove/modify
>>>> tracepoints. I had to do this job in the past (not for KVM). Having 1
>>>> spot in 1 file (based on generic probes) would be handier in that case
>>>> than 5 spots in 3 files. But if the KVM tracepoints are considered
>>>> stable in their number and structure, that shouldn't be an issue here.
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> Tracepoints aren't stable; they are artefacts of the implementation.
>>>     
>>
>> Which IMHO makes it unsuitable for trace_mark() as that will be exported
>> to user-space, and every time you change your tracepoints you'll change
>> user visible things - not nice.
>>   
>
> They are used for debugging (mostly performance related), so changes are 
> expected.
>
> What uses of trace_mark() depend on a stable interface? blktrace?
>

Actually, LTTng likes to have the { marker name, field name } pairs
unchanged for the markers it looks for, but that's about it. If a
userspace analysis plugin fails to see a marker (because it is disabled
or changed), it just does not apply its particular analysis on the
trace.

Since the markers and marker types are self-described in the trace,
userspace can detect any change the the present markers, so there is no
need to rely on "version numbers" because we are able to proceed to a
complete marker list verification (names, field names, types) before
starting the trace analysis.

Mathieu

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
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/