linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/6] tracing: Add trace event error log

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: <20180418094924.3ad22dbf@gandalf.local.home>
Date:   Wed, 18 Apr 2018 09:49:24 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc:     Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@...ux.intel.com>, tglx@...utronix.de,
        namhyung@...nel.org, vedang.patel@...el.com, bigeasy@...utronix.de,
        joel.opensrc@...il.com, joelaf@...gle.com,
        mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, baohong.liu@...el.com,
        rajvi.jingar@...el.com, julia@...com, fengguang.wu@...el.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] tracing: Add trace event error log

On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 18:34:34 +0900
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org> wrote:

> On Fri, 13 Apr 2018 10:44:32 -0400
> Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 13 Apr 2018 09:24:34 -0500
> > Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >   
> > > Yeah, I agree - I'd rather get it right than get it in now.  I thought
> > > this made sense, and was based on input from Masami, which I may have
> > > misinterpreted, but I'll wait for some more ideas about the best way to
> > > do this.  
> > 
> > Too bad we are not closer to November, as this would actually be a good
> > Plumbers topic. Maybe it's not that important and we should wait until
> > then. I'd like to get some brain storming ideas out before we decide on
> > anything, and this is something I believe is better done face to face
> > than over email.  
> 
> OK, sounds good for me too :)
> My point was that printk buffer is not good place for the parser error
> of ftrace, nor each sub-features (like hist, trigger, probe_events etc.) 
> has different place to show it. I just want to unify the user experience
> over the ftrace UI.

I totally agree. I just want to make sure that whatever we come up with
will be well thought out. Perhaps we can wait till November to talk
about it.

-- Steve