linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RESEND] scsi: Output error messages using structured printk in single line

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20140522090651.GA14854@infradead.org>
Date:	Thu, 22 May 2014 02:06:51 -0700
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>
Cc:	"Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)" <Elliott@...com>,
	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
	Yoshihiro YUNOMAE <yoshihiro.yunomae.ez@...achi.com>,
	Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>,
	"linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
	Kay Sievers <kay@...y.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Hidehiro Kawai <hidehiro.kawai.ez@...achi.com>,
	"yrl.pp-manager.tt@...achi.com" <yrl.pp-manager.tt@...achi.com>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] scsi: Output error messages using structured
 printk in single line

On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 08:30:58AM +0200, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> While this works reasonably well for most things, printing out
> decoded sense with just one line (and not end up in massive switch()
> statements) is near impossible.
> 
> Plus you'll end up having to use a static buffer at one point, which
> again increases the stack size.
> 
> The alternative approach as discussed at LSF is to move scsi_logging
> over to tracing. There is already some coding for scsi tracing, but
> in most cases it just duplicates existing logging statements.
> So if we were to replace the entire scsi_logging infrastructure
> with scsi tracing most of the issues (like chopped-up CDBs) would
> be gone.
> Plus we would have a far better control about _what_ is being printed.
> 
> And yes, I do have some patches for that :-)

I think any detailed logging of sense codes, cdbs and co should move
to tracing.  In fact generally any non-defauly logging probably is
better off in the tracing subsystems, but there might be a few
exceptions.

--
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/