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  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:   Fri, 27 Apr 2018 12:46:41 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <>
To:     "Paul E. McKenney" <>
Cc:     Joel Fernandes <>,
        LKML <>,
        Peter Zilstra <>,
        Ingo Molnar <>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <>,
        Tom Zanussi <>,
        Namhyung Kim <>,
        Thomas Glexiner <>,
        Boqun Feng <>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <>,
        Randy Dunlap <>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <>,
        Fenguang Wu <>,
        Baohong Liu <>,
        Vedang Patel <>,
        "Cc: Android Kernel" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] tracepoint: Introduce tracepoint callbacks
 executing with preempt on

On Fri, 27 Apr 2018 09:45:54 -0700
"Paul E. McKenney" <> wrote:

> > > That shouldn't be needed. For the rcu_read_lock_sched case, there is a
> > > preempt_disable which needs to be a notrace, but for the srcu one,
> > > since we don't do that, I think it should be fine.  
> > 
> > Actually, I think I may agree here too. Because the _notrace is for
> > function tracing, and it shouldn't affect it. If people don't want it
> > traced, they could add those functions to the list in the notrace file.  
> OK, feel free to ignore my notrace srcu_read_lock() patch, then.  ;-)

Of course I wasn't thinking about the lockdep tracepoints that Joel
mentioned, which happens to be the reason for all this discussion in
the first place :-)  Now I think we do need it. (OK, I can keep
changing my mind, can't I?).

-- Steve

Powered by blists - more mailing lists