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:	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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ