linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] irq: export kstat

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: <87360i99ck.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date:   Sun, 06 Dec 2020 17:40:11 +0100
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>,
        Jerry Snitselaar <jsnitsel@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
        intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>,
        Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
        Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@....de>,
        James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
        Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...gle.com>,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
        Yunfeng Ye <yeyunfeng@...wei.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>, jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com,
        joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] irq: export kstat_irqs

On Sat, Dec 05 2020 at 12:39, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 06:43:37PM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote:
>> To try and detect potential interrupt storms that
>> have been occurring with tpm_tis devices it was suggested
>> to use kstat_irqs() to get the number of interrupts.
>> Since tpm_tis can be built as a module it needs kstat_irqs
>> exported.
>
> I think you should also have a paragraph explicitly stating that
> i915_pmu.c contains a duplicate of kstat_irqs() because it is not
> exported as of today. It adds a lot more weight to this given that
> there is already existing mainline usage (kind of).

It's abusage and just the fact that it exists is not an argument by
itself.

Thanks,

        tglx