linux-kernel - Re: ehci dynamic debug problem

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20120413190311.GA6238@sig21.net>
Date:	Fri, 13 Apr 2012 21:03:11 +0200
From:	Johannes Stezenbach <js@...21.net>
To:	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc:	Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-usb@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ehci dynamic debug problem

On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 02:13:58PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Apr 2012, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
> 
> > > But there is no such thing as dynamic debug for ehci, is there?  
> > > There's a separate dynamic debug setting for each dev_dbg statement.
> > > So your ideal solution makes no sense.
> > 
> > When CONFIG_DYNAMIC_DEBUG=y but ehci debug is disabled
> 
> There is no such thing as ehci debug!  So how can it be disabled?
> There's only an individual setting for each line of debugging code.
> 
> > in /sys/kernel/debug/dynamic_debug/control, then
> > dbg_port() calls dbg_port_buf() which would
> > format the string, then calls ehci_dbg() which
> > calls dev_dbg() which discards it.
> > 
> > Does it make sense now?
> 
> No.  What happens if dynamic debug is enabled for one line that calls 
> dbg_port_buf() but not for another?  There's no way to avoid the string 
> formatting in both lines, even though one of them discards the result.

That's why I said in my initial mail:

  Does dynamic debug offer an "is the message two lines below enabled" test?

What I meant is that dbg_port() could test if it
needs to call dbg_port_buf() for this call site.


Anyway, maybe the dbg_*_buf() are not called often enough to worry?

If you're OK with "#if defined(DEBUG) || defined(CONFIG_DYNAMIC_DEBUG)"
then maybe you should just do that?


Thanks
Johannes
--
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/