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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2021 09:03:29 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> To: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>, Kate Carcia <kcarcia@...hat.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@...cle.com>, Clark Willaims <williams@...hat.com>, John Kacur <jkacur@...hat.com>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 8/9] tracing: Add osnoise tracer On Wed, 9 Jun 2021 14:14:17 +0200 Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com> wrote: > On 6/4/21 11:28 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > >> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_APIC > > I wonder if we should move this into a separate file, making the > > __trace_irq_entry() a more name space safe name and have it call that. > > I have a bit of a distaste for arch specific code in a generic file. > > > > I am placing the intel specific file in: > > arch/x86/kernel/trace_osnoise.c I would make it just arch/x86/kernel/trace.c so that it can hold all arch specific tracing information, and not need to create a file for anything else we might need later. > > and the kernel/trace/trace_osnoise.h looks like this: > > #ifdef CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_APIC > int osnoise_arch_register(void); > int osnoise_arch_unregister(void); > #else /* CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_APIC */ > #define osnoise_arch_register() do {} while (0) > #define osnoise_arch_unregister() do {} while (0) > #endif /* CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_APIC */ > > This can be used by other archs as well... > > sound reasonable? > The proper way to d that is to use weak functions in the C code in the generic file. int __weak osnoise_arch_register(void) { return 0; } int __weak osnoise_arch_unregister(void) { return 0; } Hmm, does the unregister really need a return value? -- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists