linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] timekeeping: Add tracepoints for xtime changes

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 01 Apr 2013 16:47:05 -0600
From:	David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
To:	John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
CC:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] timekeeping: Add tracepoints for xtime changes - v2

On 4/1/13 4:16 PM, John Stultz wrote:
> I guess what I'm getting at is: What ABI are we creating here?  Can
> these tracepoints come and go without any consequence? Or would changing
> them in the future cause application breakage?
>
> I'm somewhat worried even trace_tod_update() is maybe too vague (again
> not that the name specifically is critical, but that the semantics we're
> specifying are clear). In other words, I think you're wanting a
> tracepoint at any time CLOCK_REALTIME is updated by anything other then
> the normal progression of time? Is that right?

yes. essentially everywhere timekeeping_update() is called except 
update_wall_time().

>
> You may want to also include the leapsecond modification in the tracing
> as well.

I thought those were covered as well. hmm... maybe not if it triggers in 
update_wall_time.

David
--
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/