linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] convert to syscall tracepoints

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:	Mon, 8 Jun 2009 22:40:56 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, fweisbec@...il.com,
	laijs@...fujitsu.com, rostedt@...dmis.org, peterz@...radead.org,
	mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca, jiayingz@...gle.com,
	mbligh@...gle.com, roland@...hat.com, fche@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] convert to syscall tracepoints

* Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com> wrote:

> +#ifdef __NR_time
> +trace_event_syscall(1, time, time_t __user *, tloc);
> +#endif
> +
> +#ifdef __NR_stime
> +trace_event_syscall(1, stime, time_t __user *, tptr);
> +#endif
> +
> +#ifdef __NR_gettimeofday
> +trace_event_syscall(2, gettimeofday, struct timeval __user *, tv, struct timezone __user *, tz);
> +#endif

This could be reduced to a single line: just add a Kconfig entry 
(say TRACE_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINTS) wether an arch supports syscall 
tracepoints, enable it on a sane arch, make sure it has all the 
syscalls and list them ...

As more architectures turn on SYSCALL_TRACEPOINTS, they'll have to 
resolve any deviations in syscall entry points. Ideally we'd have 
one generic table that covers 95% of all syscalls, and the remaining 
5% in some architecture specific #ifdef section.

But, more generally, i'm not at all convinced that we need _any_ of 
this enumeration. Look how much the above lines duplicate 
DEFINE_SYSCALL macros. Why arent those macros re-used?

We dont need too smart pretty-printing i think - we only want to 
know the field size and the field name - nothing else. Duplicating 
all those definitions looks outright wrong to me. Do we really, 
really, really have to do it?

	Ingo
--
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/