linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH ftrace/core v3 2/3] ftrace, kprobes: Support IPMODIFY flag to find IP modify conflict

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:	Fri, 18 Jul 2014 09:51:32 -0400
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
Cc:	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
	Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH ftrace/core v3 2/3] ftrace, kprobes: Support IPMODIFY
 flag to find IP modify conflict

On Fri, 18 Jul 2014 16:09:07 +0900
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com> wrote:


> > "The ops can modify the IP register. This can only be set along with
> > SAVE_REGS. If another ops is already registered for any of the
> > functions that this ops will be registered for, then this ops will fail
> > to register."
> 
> Not only register, but also set_filter_ip ;)
> "...will fail to register or set_filter_ip."

Sure.


> >> diff --git a/kernel/kprobes.c b/kernel/kprobes.c
> >> index 3214289..e52d86f 100644
> >> --- a/kernel/kprobes.c
> >> +++ b/kernel/kprobes.c
> > 
> > I think this should be split into two patches. One that adds the ftrace
> > infrastructure, and the other that adds the kprobes user of the
> > IPMODIFY flag.
> 
> Hmm, I thought that it was natural to introduce new feature and its user
> together, so that we could use git-bisect safely.

It should still be bisect friendly. That is, the feature is added
before the user, not the user before the feature ;-)

I know some people like the feature and user in one patch, but for me,
when the user is in a different sub system (here it's kprobes) from the
infrastructure that is changing (ftrace), I prefer separate patches.

The user patch shows me where the users are. When they are one patch, I
tend to have them get lost.

-- 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/