linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] tracepoints: Add helper to test if tracepoint is enabled in a header

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:   Thu, 24 Sep 2020 16:33:31 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@...il.com>,
        Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@...gle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>,
        Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>,
        Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@...e.de>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] tracepoints: Add helper to test if tracepoint is
 enabled in a header

On Thu, 24 Sep 2020 16:27:34 -0400 (EDT)
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com> wrote:

> I'd be a bit more specific: so far, the msr.h use-case requires to include
> directly tracepoint-defs.h and use a tracepoint_enabled() macro defined there.
> 
> Other less "core" header use-cases could still include tracepoint.h, as long as
> there is no circular dependency.

Well, I'll keep tracepoint-defs.h for the msr.h case, and I could see
if tracepoint.h is good enough for the other cases.

But does it really matter, if we only need what is in
tracepoint-defs.h?  Why add something that may cause issues in the
future?

-- Steve