linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] tracing/function-return-tracer: add the overrun field

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: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0811181151010.15003@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date:	Tue, 18 Nov 2008 11:53:06 -0500 (EST)
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] tracing/function-return-tracer: add the overrun
 field

On Tue, 18 Nov 2008, Fr?d?ric Weisbecker wrote:

> 2008/11/18 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>:
> > Would be nice to have the dynamic allocation straight away
> 
> 2008/11/18 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>:
> > I would recommend using a static array
> 
> :-)

How about a compromise, start off the patch series getting it working with 
task struct static array, and then finish the series with the dynamic 
array.

This is my development model, because it lets me know where the bugs are 
better. If we find some strange bug, this can help pin point via a bisect 
if the bug is with the general code, or with the use of a dynamic array.

Just my preference ;-)

-- Steve

--
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/