linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] tracing: identify which executable object the userspace address belongs to

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <493ECBC7.4050109@gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 09 Dec 2008 21:49:27 +0200
From:	Török Edwin <edwintorok@...il.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>, srostedt@...hat.com,
	sandmann@...mi.au.dk, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	viro@...IV.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] tracing: identify which executable object the userspace
 address belongs to

On 2008-11-27 16:51, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Török Edwin <edwintorok@...il.com> wrote:
>
>   
>> Thanks. I can move on to the lock latency tracing ;)
>>     
>
> that's a bit more contentious ...
>
>   
>> I'll send out a draft of tracepoints that I would need to trace lock 
>> latency. I'll try to put them in same place as lockstat (but not 
>> necesarely depending on lockstat being enabled).
>>     
>
>   
>> Or I could add the tracepoints inside lockstat (now that it has 
>> contend with points feature), and use the information already 
>> gathered by lockstat, but augment it with finer grained counts per 
>> kernel/user stacktrace. (again there would be an ftrace plugin that 
>> would register with the tracepoints, and show the per stacktrace 
>> statistic in /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/trace).
>>     
>
> yes. The less intrusive your patch is, the more you utilize and 
> generalize existing facilities, the better. You could split the 
> Kconfig of LOCKSTAT into two bits: LOCKSTAT (core) and LOCKSTAT_PROC, 
> where the proc bits are enabled separately.
>
> Your tracing approach could then reuse much of core LOCKSTAT (without 
> even touching the code) and just plain "select LOCKSTAT" - without 
> creating /proc/lockdep_stats.
>
> Peter, what do you think?

Ping? I may have some time to work on this in the weekend ...

Best regards,
--Edwin
--
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/