linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm64: add HAVE_LATENCYTOP

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: <20151110074124.GB6672@osiris>
Date:	Tue, 10 Nov 2015 08:41:24 +0100
From:	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
To:	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Cc:	yalin wang <yalin.wang2010@...il.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: add HAVE_LATENCYTOP_SUPPORT config

On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 04:21:10PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 07, 2015 at 12:11:16AM +0800, yalin wang wrote:
> > i just enable it on ARM64,
> > and it can work,
> > i don’t see some special requirement to enable this config .
> 
> Right, so why does HAVE_LATENCYTOP_SUPPORT exist?

If I remember correctly then the only dependency was that an architecture
must have implemented save_stack_trace_tsk().
See git commit a3afe70b83fdbbd4d757d2911900d168bc798a31.

So the name of HAVE_LATENCYTOP_SUPPORT is surely a not well chosen, and I
think I introduced it back then. Oh, well.

And looking through the kernel there is at least avr32 which would break
at build time if the config option would be removed completely.

So.. renaming it to STACKTRACE_TSK_SUPPORT would be a good idea.

Will do when time permits, unless somebody else volunteers.

--
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/