linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] clk: Add tracepoints for hardware operations

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:	Mon, 30 Jun 2014 21:11:55 -0400
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
Cc:	Mike Turquette <mturquette@...aro.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: Add tracepoints for hardware operations

On Mon, 30 Jun 2014 18:07:49 -0700
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org> wrote:

> >
> >>  		if (clk->ops->enable) {
> >>  			ret = clk->ops->enable(clk->hw);
> >>  			if (ret) {
> >> @@ -945,6 +965,7 @@ static int __clk_enable(struct clk *clk)
> >>  				return ret;
> > It may make even more sense to add the tracepoints within the if
> > statement. Especially if you have a return on error.
> >
> >
> 
> Right. I was thinking that no "clk*_complete" event would mean there was
> some error. Detecting that case is not so easy though. It may be better
> to always have the completion event so we know how long hardware
> operations take and so that error handling is simpler.
> 

You could also have the event record the ret as well.

-- 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/