linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] ftrace: Implement fs notification for tracing_max

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20190522104332.3564e82f@gandalf.local.home>
Date:   Wed, 22 May 2019 10:43:32 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Viktor Rosendahl <viktor.rosendahl@...il.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] ftrace: Implement fs notification for
 tracing_max_latency

On Wed, 22 May 2019 16:35:45 +0200
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:

> > @@ -284,6 +285,7 @@ static void do_idle(void)
> >  	smp_mb__after_atomic();
> >  
> >  	sched_ttwu_pending();
> > +	/* schedule_idle() will call trace_enable_fsnotify() */
> >  	schedule_idle();
> >  
> >  	if (unlikely(klp_patch_pending(current)))  
> 
> I still hate this.. why are we doing this? We already have this
> stop_critical_timings() nonsense and are now adding more gunk.

I was thinking that this can possibly be added in the
stop_critical_timings() as that is probably where this is needed
anyway.

-- Steve