linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] tracing: Add support for preempt and irq enable/disable events

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: <20171004130351.7a24d0ba@gandalf.local.home>
Date:   Wed, 4 Oct 2017 13:03:51 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] tracing: Add support for preempt and irq
 enable/disable events

On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 09:56:33 -0700
Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com> wrote:

> > I don't see the protection in the patches. I will definitely test that
> > before pushing it anywhere.  
> 
> The protection added by CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING was already there before
> my patches. I just moved the code around in patch 1/2, nothing changed
> in that patch. I already tested the combination of PROVE_LOCKING
> enabled and disabled and several other combinations on your -next
> tree. It all compiled fine. Here is my test script FWIW:
> (By the way, do you mean that another tree/branch than your -next or
> Linus's master has protection removed? If so, could you let me know
> which tree/branch?)

Using Linus's master is usually fine, but if you want to see what I'm
working on, just look at the ftrace/core branch of my linux-trace.git
tree on kernel.org. Note, that branch often rebases. My for-next branch
does not.

Also note, I'm currently looking to pull in Tom Zanussi's hist patch
series, and then I'll get to yours afterward.

-- Steve