linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] sched: Add new tracepoints required for EAS testing

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:   Mon, 17 Jun 2019 17:22:43 +0100
From:   Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@....com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Pavankumar Kondeti <pkondeti@...eaurora.org>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
        Uwe Kleine-Konig <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] sched: Add new tracepoints required for EAS
 testing

On 06/17/19 17:55, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 01:51:23PM +0100, Qais Yousef wrote:
> > Hi Peter
> > 
> > On 06/04/19 12:14, Qais Yousef wrote:
> > > Changes in v3:
> > > 	- Split pelt_rq TP into pelt_cfs, pelt_rq, pelt_dl and pelt_irq
> > > 	- Replace the fatty preprocessing wrappers with exported helper
> > > 	  functions to access data in unexported structures.
> > > 	- Remove the now unnecessary headers that were introduced in the
> > > 	  previous versions.
> > > 	- Postfix the tracepoints with '_tp' to make them standout more in the
> > > 	  code as bare tracepoints with no events associated.
> > > 	- Updated the example module in [2]
> > > 		- It demonstrates now how to convert the tracepoints into trace
> > > 		  events that extend the sched events subsystem in tracefs.
> > 
> > Does this look okay now? If you have further comments please let me know so
> > I can address them in time in hope it'd make it to the next merge window.
> 
> Picked them up (with some minor edits). I feel there is far too much

Thanks!

> #ifdef in patch #2, but I couldn't quickly come up with anything much
> saner either.

We can protect the whole lot with #ifdef CONFIG_SMP? It means the external
module will fail to compile for UP configurations - which is fine I think since
we're just returning NULL anyway..

--
Qais Yousef