linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] tracing: syscall_regfunc() should not skip kernel threads

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:	Sun, 17 Mar 2013 15:36:12 -0400
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
	linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] tracing: syscall_regfunc() should not skip kernel
 threads

On Sun, 2013-03-17 at 20:04 +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:

> > I'm really thinking the TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT flag is getting a bit
> > ridiculous. We really should have a "swap syscall table when tracepoints
> > enabled" that changes the syscall table that does exactly the same thing
> > as the normal table but wraps the system call with the tracepoints.
> 
> But we also need to force the slow path in system_call...

Why? If we remove the tracepoint from the slowpath and use a table swap,
then we wouldn't need to use the slowpath at all.

> 
> Anyway, do you agree with this change for now?

Well, if it's solving a bug today sure. But we should really be looking
at fixing what's there for the future.

-- 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/