| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <m2bovvn5s5.fsf@firstfloor.org> Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 11:48:26 -0700 From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> To: Alex Neronskiy <zakmagnus@...omium.org> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, peterz@...radead.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>, Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@...omium.org>, Alex Neronskiy <zakmagnus@...omium.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] Output stall data in debugfs Alex Neronskiy <zakmagnus@...omium.org> writes: > From: Alex Neronskiy <zakmagnus@...omium.com> > > Instead of using the log, use debugfs for output of both stall > lengths and stack traces. Printing to the log can result in > watchdog touches, Why? Because of printk being slow or something else? The first could be probably workarounded, especially if you already have "two buffers" > distorting the very events being measured. > Additionally, the information will not distract from lockups > when users view the log. > > A two-buffer system is used to ensure that the trace information > can always be recorded without contention. This implies that kernel bug reports will often not contain the back trace, right? Seems like a bad thing to me because it will make bug reports worse. -Andi -- ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists