linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] trace,x86: add x86 irq vector tracepoints

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: <20121006233322.GC3278@liondog.tnic>
Date:	Sun, 7 Oct 2012 01:33:22 +0200
From:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Seiji Aguchi <seiji.aguchi@....com>,
	"Thomas Gleixner (tglx@...utronix.de)" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"'mingo@...e.hu' (mingo@...e.hu)" <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
	"dle-develop@...ts.sourceforge.net" 
	<dle-develop@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	Satoru Moriya <satoru.moriya@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] trace,x86: add x86 irq vector tracepoints

On Sat, Oct 06, 2012 at 02:26:17PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-10-06 at 19:32 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> 
> > > 2) Are the tracepoints done in a way that it's not going to cause "ABI"
> > > issues. If not then we need to redesign the tracepoints.
> > 
> > Btw, this we should be asking ourselves about *all* TPs, especially if
> > they're in generic code.
> 
> I agree, and I'm starting to think I shouldn't have given free reign
> over the TPs to system maintainers. That is, I should have pushed harder
> to understand all tracepoints added to code to make sure the maintainer
> knows that it can become an ABI.
> 
> Some maintainers don't worry about it. But I can see it coming back to
> haunt them. In the end, it will hurt the maintainer of the code, which
> is why I gave the ownership of tracepoints to locations where they are
> at (instead of a "joint" ownership). But I probably should have been a
> TP cop for a while to allow them to understand the consequences first.

Yeah, even if you were the TP cop and had a shiny uniform with a badge
8-), do you think you'd have the time to review all the code adding TPs?

I think maybe it would've been better to add some text to Documentation
explaining with what care TPs should be designed, have checkpatch warn
on all new tracepoints, hope for the best and prepare for the worst. In
addition maybe review all TPs added to generic or arch-you-care-about
code. Maybe...

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.
--
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/