linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 20/24] dyndbg: WIP towards debug-print-class based callsite controls

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, 16 Jun 2020 14:05:27 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>, Jim Cromie <jim.cromie@...il.com>
Cc:     jbaron@...mai.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        akpm@...uxfoundation.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        linux@...musvillemoes.dk
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 20/24] dyndbg: WIP towards debug-print-class based
 callsite controls

On Tue, 2020-06-16 at 15:45 +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Sat 2020-06-13 09:57:34, Jim Cromie wrote:
> > There are *lots* of ad-hoc debug printing solutions in kernel,
> > this is a 1st attempt at providing a common mechanism for many of them.
> 
> I agree that it might make sense to provide some common mechanism.
[]
> My problem with this approach is that it is too generic. Each class
> would have different meaning in each subsystem.
> 
> It might help to replace any existing variants. But it would be hard
> for developers debugging the code. They would need to study/remember
> the meaning of these groups for particular subsystems. They would
> need to set different values for different messages.
> 
> Could you please provide more details about the potential users?
> Would be possible to find some common patterns and common
> meaning of the groups?

I doubt the utility of common patterns.
Verbosity is common but groupings are not.

Look at the DRM patterns vs other groups.

$ git grep 'MODULE_PARM_DESC.*debug'