linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] tools lib traceevent: Introduce pevent

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, 15 Jun 2012 08:25:29 -0400
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Cc:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] tools lib traceevent: Introduce pevent_strerror

On Fri, 2012-06-15 at 18:04 +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:

> 
> > If you need the code to be thread safe, have all errors do:
> >
> > 	ret = pevent_foo();
> > 	if (ret < 0) {
> > 		pevent_strerr_val(ret, buf, buflen);
> >
> >
> > For programs that do not need to be thread safe, then:
> >
> > 	ret = pevent_foo();
> > 	if (ret < 0) {
> > 		pevent_strerr(pevent, buf, buflen);
> >
> 
> Do we really need these two? I think having a single API is just
> enough, IMHO.

Hmm, maybe not. I guess I was confused about the need to pass the pevent
into the function. I think we only need the return val. Or is there
other data in the future that you envision will require needing pevent
passed in?

-- 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/