linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] trace: Export anonymous tracing

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]

Message-ID: <20200301193649.71da6747@oasis.local.home>
Date:   Sun, 1 Mar 2020 19:36:49 -0500
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>
Cc:     intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] trace: Export anonymous tracing

On Sun, 01 Mar 2020 22:22:25 +0000
Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk> wrote:

> > I'm curious to why we need it to be anonymous. Why not allow them to be
> > visible from the tracing directory. This could allow for easier
> > debugging. Note, the trace instances have ref counters thus they can't
> > be removed if something has a reference to it.  
> 
> Do you really want a few thousand (or even tens) i915-client-%d? That
> does not particularly seem like it adds ease-of-use, and would need to be
> restricted to the client [or root]. The intent is for the client to have
> a private channel for detailed debug/error reporting of its own calls
> into the kernel.

Wow! I didn't expect this to have that many anonymous users. What is
the use case for again?

-- Steve