linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC v1 0/4] perf: Introduce extended syscall error reporting

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:	Wed, 5 Aug 2015 19:01:00 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	adrian.hunter@...el.com,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
	Vince Weaver <vince@...ter.net>,
	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v1 0/4] perf: Introduce extended syscall error
 reporting

On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 02:45:55PM +0300, Alexander Shishkin wrote:
> Hi Peter and Ingo and everybody,
> 
> Here's my second stab at improving perf's error reporting by attaching
> arbitrary strings to the integer error codes. This is largely based
> off of the previous email thread [1].
> 
> This time around, I employed a linker trick to convert the structures
> containing extended error information into integers, which are then
> made to look just like normal error codes so that IS_ERR_VALUE() and
> friends would still work correctly on them. So no extra pointers in
> the struct perf_event or anywhere else; the extended error codes are
> passed around like normal error codes. They only need to be converted
> in syscalls' topmost return statements. This is done in 1/4.
> 
> Then, 2/4 illustrates how error sites can be extended to include more
> information such as file names and line numbers [1].
> 
> The other two patches add perf_err() annotation to a few semi-randomly
> picked places in perf core (3/4) and x86 bits (4/4).

Looks generally ok to me. Thanks for doing this.


--
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/