linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] tracing/events/lockdep: move tracepoints within recursive protection

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]

Date:	Thu, 16 Apr 2009 18:47:49 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] tracing/events/lockdep: move tracepoints within
 recursive protection

On Thu, 2009-04-16 at 12:15 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> plain text document attachment
> (0002-tracing-events-lockdep-move-tracepoints-within-recu.patch)
> From: Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>
> 
> With the current location of the tracepoints in lockdep, the system
> can hard lockup in minutes when the tracepoints are enabled.
> 
> Moving the tracepoints outside inside the lockdep protection solves
> the issue.

NAK

the idea is to eventually move lockdep on top of the tracepoints. The
tracer should grow to be more robust and handle recursion itself.

Its likely a case of the tracer using a spinlock or mutex in the
tracepoint code. When I did the tracepoints I converted one such to a
raw_spinlock_t in the trace_print code.



--
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/