linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/7] time: Rework debugging variables so they aren't global

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]

Message-ID: <20150521061408.GA11077@gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 21 May 2015 08:14:08 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>,
	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] time: Rework debugging variables so they aren't
 global


* John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org> wrote:

> Ingo suggested that the timekeeping debugging variables
> recently added should not be global, and should be tied
> to the timekeeper's read_base.
> 
> Thus this patch implements that suggestion.
> 
> This version is differnet from the earlier versions

s/differnet/
  different

> as it keeps the variables in the timekeeper structure
> rather then in the tkr.

> + * @last_warning:	Warning ratelimiter (DEBUG_TIMEKEEPING)
> + * @underflow_seen:	Underflow warning flag (DEBUG_TIMEKEEPING)
> + * @overflow_seen:	Overflow warning flag (DEBUG_TIMEKEEPING)
>   *
>   * Note: For timespec(64) based interfaces wall_to_monotonic is what
>   * we need to add to xtime (or xtime corrected for sub jiffie times)
> @@ -106,6 +109,18 @@ struct timekeeper {
>  	s64			ntp_error;
>  	u32			ntp_error_shift;
>  	u32			ntp_err_mult;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_TIMEKEEPING
> +	long			last_warning;
> +	/*
> +	 * These simple flag variables are managed
> +	 * without locks, which is racy, but ok since
> +	 * we don't really care about being super
> +	 * precise about how many events were seen,
> +	 * just that a problem was observed.

s/but ok since/
  but they are ok since

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/