linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] sched: Add preempt checks in preempt

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: <20160321141145.GV6344@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:	Mon, 21 Mar 2016 15:11:45 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Add preempt checks in preempt_schedule() code

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 09:29:32AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 10:27:46 +0100
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> 
> > So no real objection to the patch except this naming.
> > 
> > It doesn't 'check', it does preempt-latency tracing. So could we rename
> > this to something like:
> > 
> > 	preempt_{dis,en}able_latency()
> > 
> > or somesuch?
> 
> What about:
> 
>  preempt_enable_trace() or preempt_enable_trace_test()?

So the problem with preempt_enable_trace() is that we just called a
_notrace(), and while I now know these are two different trace thingies,
I might have forgotten that in a few days.