linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] Stop tracing on a schedule bug

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: <v2s40ec3ea41004161014o484fa344x9e3ac871019161fa@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 16 Apr 2010 10:14:40 -0700
From:	Chase Douglas <chase.douglas@...onical.com>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] Stop tracing on a schedule bug

On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 9:46 AM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-04-15 at 21:01 -0700, Chase Douglas wrote:
>> > 2) tracing off can be done via filters on functions and/or events
>> >   already - so I doubt that the tracing_off_event(level) is necessary
>> >   at all.
>> >
>> >   schedule_bug() definitely deserves a separate trace_schedule_bug()
>> >   event which can be used to stop the tracer by already existing
>> >   functionality.
>>
>> Steven said he would be fine with a separate TRACE_EVENT_<blah> macro
>> for the schedule bug if needed, but I'm not sure we need to go that
>> far. If it's configurable through debugfs at run time then it serves
>> my purpose. Unless you feel we should have finer grained control
>> specifically for scheduling while atomic bugs, I'll just leave it as
>> TRACE_EVENT_WARN.
>
> I actually like Thomas's idea better. I need to add the "stop trace on
> event" functionality, and we can insert trace events for bugs, and not
> have this whole "stop tracing here" functions. Instead we could just add
> tracepoints and have a way to pick and choose where to stop tracing.
>
> add a:
>
> include/trace/events/errors.h
>
> #define TRACE_SYSTEM errors
>
> TRACE_EVENT(sched_bug, ....)
>
> etc,
>
>
> When I get back home, I'll add this functionality to stop tracing on
> events. Perhaps I'll even add "TRACE_SUB_SYSTEM" so in the events
> directory, we can have sub layers:
>
> events/errors/BUG/...
> events/errors/WARNING/...
>
> etc

Ok, I see where this is going now. I agree this sounds like a much
better approach. I'll wait for the implementation of the stop tracing
on event functionality so I know how it will work, and then I can
submit patches for the BUG, WARN, panic, and schedule_bug paths.

-- Chase
--
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/