linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v12 3/3] tracing: Centralize preemptirq tracepoints and unify their usage

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, 8 Aug 2018 12:24:04 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:     Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Cc: Android Kernel" <kernel-team@...roid.com>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
        Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Glexiner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@...ux.intel.com>, will.deacon@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 3/3] tracing: Centralize preemptirq tracepoints and
 unify their usage

On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 09:02:43 -0700
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> > Which leaves us with sparc, arm, mips, sh and powerpc.
> > 
> > sh is almost dead, and powerpc can be fixed, which I guess leaves us
> > with sparc, arm and mips.  
> 
> If we want to stick with the current srcu_read_lock() and srcu_read_unlock(),
> you mean?  I would like that sort of outcome, at least assuming we are not
> hammering any of the architectures.

I would go with the local_inc approach, and even add a
srcu_read_un/lock_nmi() that does that if you want. Probably should add
lockdep to detect if the _nmi calls is ever used along with non _nmi
calls and complain about that.

But this will be something for the next merge window, not the one
coming up.

-- Steve