linux-kernel - Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v7 5/8] drm_print: add choice to use dynamic debug in drm-debug

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 6 Sep 2021 12:24:46 -0600
From:   jim.cromie@...il.com
To:     Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        amd-gfx mailing list <amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        intel-gvt-dev@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v7 5/8] drm_print: add choice to use dynamic
 debug in drm-debug

> I'll try to extract the "executive summary" from this, you tell me if I
> got it right.
>
> So using or not using dynamic debug for DRM debug ends up being about
> shifting the cost between kernel binary size (data section grows by each
> pr_debug call site) and runtime conditionals?

Yes.

> Since the table sizes you mention seem significant enough, I think that
> justifies existence of DRM_USE_DYNAMIC_DEBUG. It would probably be a
> good idea to put some commentary on that there. Ideally including some
> rough estimates both including space cost per call site and space cost
> for a typical distro kernel build?

yeah, agreed.  I presume you mean in Kconfig entry,
since commits have some size info now - I have i915, amdgpu, nouveau;
I can see some prose improvements for 5/8




> Regards,
>
> Tvrtko

thanks
Jim