linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] ftrace: updates to tip

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.1.10.0901161050470.22303@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date:	Fri, 16 Jan 2009 10:53:42 -0500 (EST)
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] ftrace: updates to tip


On Fri, 16 Jan 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > But I do notice that not all functions produce a valid stack trace. 
> > Maybe it would be better to add that api :-?
> 
> yes - i think that API would be more intuitive, and that way people could 
> mix more interesting functions (with stack traces) with less important 
> functions (no stack traces).

Ah, that's the point. We can't mix and match on these. Either all 
functions that are traced do the stack trace, or none do. This is where 
the new api may be confusing.  We can register a function to be traced via 
the function pointer, and we can pick which functions to trace, but we can 
not separate out different functions for different traces.

-- 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/