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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2014 18:31:34 +0100 From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk> Cc: David Long <dave.long@...aro.org>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, Rabin Vincent <rabin@....in>, "Jon Medhurst (Tixy)" <tixy@...aro.org>, Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>, Anil S Keshavamurthy <anil.s.keshavamurthy@...el.com>, davem@...emloft.net, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/14] uprobes: Add uprobes support for ARM On 03/04, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 09:50:39PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > > And why CONFIG_UPROBES should depend on PERF_EVENTS? uprobes can be > > used by (say) systemtap without UPROBE_EVENT/PERF_EVENTS. > > > > But as Russell pointed out the events directory is only built if > > CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS=y, so it should depend on it or select... > > > > > > I dunno. Personally I vote for the patch from Srikar in > > > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1017186 > > > > This is what we currently have, currently CONFIG_UPROBES is not > > user-selectable anyway. > > Yes, me too, but with the proviso that UPROBE_EVENT also sorts itself > out with PERF_EVENTS in some way too (either by selecting it, which > IMHO isn't nice, or by depending on it, or the build dependency itself > gets sorted.) OK... what do you think about the patch below for now? > Maybe a simpler answer would be to change the build stuff (hand-crafted): > > kernel/Makefile > -obj-$(CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS) += events/ > +obj-y += events/ > > and kernel/events/Makefile: > > -obj-y := core.o ring_buffer.o callchain.o > +perf-y := core.o ring_buffer.o callchain.o > > -obj-$(CONFIG_HAVE_HW_BREAKPOINT) += hw_breakpoint.o > +perf-$(CONFIG_HAVE_HW_BREAKPOINT) += hw_breakpoint.o > + > +obj-${CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS) += $(perf-y) I fully agree. Except I can't review this change ;) But hopefully I can understand what it should do. But personally I'd prefer to start with the simple/safe change which allows us to merge this series. If nothing else, even if I think that kernel/events/uprobes.c doesn't need CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS, this should be verified and discussed with perf maintainers. If you agree with the patch below, how should we route it? I won't argue if you push it along with other patches from David. BTW... why UPROBE_EVENT depends on MMU? I think that ARCH_SUPPORTS_UPROBES should not be true if !CONFIG_MMU. Oleg. --- diff --git a/arch/Kconfig b/arch/Kconfig index 80bbb8c..97ff872 100644 --- a/arch/Kconfig +++ b/arch/Kconfig @@ -86,9 +86,7 @@ config KPROBES_ON_FTRACE optimize on top of function tracing. config UPROBES - bool "Transparent user-space probes (EXPERIMENTAL)" - depends on UPROBE_EVENT && PERF_EVENTS - default n + def_bool n select PERCPU_RWSEM help Uprobes is the user-space counterpart to kprobes: they @@ -101,8 +99,6 @@ config UPROBES managed by the kernel and kept transparent to the probed application. ) - If in doubt, say "N". - config HAVE_64BIT_ALIGNED_ACCESS def_bool 64BIT && !HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS help diff --git a/kernel/trace/Kconfig b/kernel/trace/Kconfig index 015f85a..8639819 100644 --- a/kernel/trace/Kconfig +++ b/kernel/trace/Kconfig @@ -424,6 +424,7 @@ config UPROBE_EVENT bool "Enable uprobes-based dynamic events" depends on ARCH_SUPPORTS_UPROBES depends on MMU + depends on PERF_EVENTS select UPROBES select PROBE_EVENTS select TRACING -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists