linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] trace: Move trace data to new section _ftrace

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:   Tue, 18 Feb 2020 19:09:10 -0800
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] trace: Move trace data to new section
 _ftrace_data

On Tue, 2020-02-18 at 21:53 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Feb 2020 18:03:16 -0800
> Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
> 
> > Move the trace data to a separate section to make it easier to
> > examine the amount of actual data in an object file.
> 
> Not that I'm against this patch set, but can you elaborate more on
> "make it easier to examine the amount of actual data in an object file".

size -A <object> would now show each section of an
object file separating normal data from trace data.

It makes it easier to identify data that could be const like
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/60559197a1af9e0af7f329cc3427989e5756846f.camel@perches.com/

> Also, don't use "_ftrace" as the section name. "ftrace" should be
> reserved for the function hook part of tracing, which trace events do
> not apply to. "_trace_event_data" would be more appropriate.

I don't care about the section name at all.

I used that name for consistency with _ftrace_event
in the same file. 
Perhaps the _ftrace_event section
name could be renamed to something
intelligible too.