linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/7] ftrace: Add enable/disable ftrace

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: <1327684899.22710.115.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date:	Fri, 27 Jan 2012 12:21:39 -0500
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Cc:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>, mingo@...hat.com,
	paulus@...ba.org, acme@...stprotocols.net, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, aarapov@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] ftrace: Add enable/disable ftrace_ops control
 interface

On Fri, 2012-01-27 at 17:54 +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote:

> yay.. ok :) so this one is triggered only if there's CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT
> option enabled.. seems to me it'd better to keep the implicit check anyway.

If the per_cpu pointer usage already warns if preemption is not
disabled, then we don't need the extra check. I think I was the one to
recommend adding it, but if the warning is already there, I don't think
it is necessary. You can still keep a comment, and even say, the per_cpu
pointer usage will complain when CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT is enabled, if
this is called without preemption disabled.

-- Steve

--
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/