linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 7/7] tracing: Un-export ftrace_set_clr

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:   Fri, 2 Aug 2019 14:12:54 -0700
From:   Divya Indi <divya.indi@...cle.com>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Joe Jin <joe.jin@...cle.com>,
        Aruna Ramakrishna <aruna.ramakrishna@...cle.com>,
        Srinivas Eeda <srinivas.eeda@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] tracing: Un-export ftrace_set_clr_event

Hi Steve,

The first patch would be like a temporary fix in case we need more 
changes to the patches that add the new function - trace_array_set_clr() 
and unexport ftrace_set_clr_event() and might take some time. In which 
case I think it would be good to have this in place (But, not part of 
this series).

If they all are to go in together as part of the same release ie if all 
is good with the concerned patches (Patch 6 & Patch 7), then I think 
having this patch would be meaningless.

Thanks,

Divya

On 8/2/19 1:46 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Aug 2019 13:41:20 -0700
> Divya Indi <divya.indi@...cle.com> wrote:
>
>>> As a stand alone patch, the first one may be fine. But as part of a
>>> series, it doesn't make sense to add it.
>> I see. Will separate this out from the series.
> Is that really needed? Do you need to have that patch in the kernel?
>
> Do you plan on marking it for stable?
>
> -- Steve