linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V8 08/10] ras: acpi / apei: generate trace event for unrecognized CPER section

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, 15 Feb 2017 12:03:42 -0500
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     "Baicar, Tyler" <tbaicar@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     christoffer.dall@...aro.org, marc.zyngier@....com,
        pbonzini@...hat.com, rkrcmar@...hat.com, linux@...linux.org.uk,
        catalin.marinas@....com, will.deacon@....com, rjw@...ysocki.net,
        lenb@...nel.org, matt@...eblueprint.co.uk, robert.moore@...el.com,
        lv.zheng@...el.com, nkaje@...eaurora.org, zjzhang@...eaurora.org,
        mark.rutland@....com, james.morse@....com,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, eun.taik.lee@...sung.com,
        sandeepa.s.prabhu@...il.com, labbott@...hat.com,
        shijie.huang@....com, rruigrok@...eaurora.org,
        paul.gortmaker@...driver.com, tn@...ihalf.com, fu.wei@...aro.org,
        bristot@...hat.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, devel@...ica.org,
        Suzuki.Poulose@....com, punit.agrawal@....com, astone@...hat.com,
        harba@...eaurora.org, hanjun.guo@...aro.org, john.garry@...wei.com,
        shiju.jose@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V8 08/10] ras: acpi / apei: generate trace event for
 unrecognized CPER section

On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 09:54:09 -0700
"Baicar, Tyler" <tbaicar@...eaurora.org> wrote:
\
> 
> In v9 I currently have this and the ARM trace event from this series 
> both wrapped in an
> ifdef verifying that CONFIG_RAS is enabled. This resolves the kbuild 
> failures and
> will have this code compiled out when that config isn't enabled. Do you 
> think I
> should use the ifdef or use these *_enabled() functions?
> 

I believe you need both. The *_enabled() functions wont prevent build
errors. But since tracing is seldom enabled (usually only when you want
to see what's happening), the *_enabled() functions optimize the code
to not perform tasks that are only needed when tracing is enabled. When
I say "enabled" I mean actively tracing, as supposed to being just
enabled in the kernel.

-- Steve