linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tracing/lockdep: turn lock->name into an array

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: <20090417202936.GB6331@nowhere>
Date:	Fri, 17 Apr 2009 22:29:37 +0200
From:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Zhaolei <zhaolei@...fujitsu.com>,
	Tom Zanussi <tzanussi@...il.com>,
	Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing/lockdep: turn lock->name into an array

On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 01:36:58PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> 
> 
> On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 2009-04-17 at 10:25 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> > > Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > > We could zap all pending trace entries on module unload (it is a 
> > > > rare operation)
> > > 
> > > ....Unless you're trying to trace something across a module unload.  I 
> > > don't know if its at all practical, but it would be nice to just zap the 
> > > pointers within the buffer, rather than the whole buffer.
> > 
> > I think the new __string() thing that's in the works will avoid the
> > whole problem by copying the string into the buffer, instead of keeping
> > a reference.
> 
> Speaking of which. We have not heard back from Frederic on this yet. I 
> hope he's taking a break, enjoying the sun, and not stuck on some tricky 
> macro crap ;-)
> 
> -- Steve
>



Oh you haven't yet received my mail about that?
It said I was cheering up about your and Peter's idea of using offsets
instead of pointer because of the end result:

- We can use as much __string() as we want
- No need for something else, such as the strcpy bits
- We are not forced to put it in the end of the patch
- Which means I will implement that in a v3 very soon ;-)

Frederic.

--
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/