linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] i2c: add tracepoints for I2C slave events

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:   Fri, 18 Mar 2022 07:09:32 -0700
From:   Jae Hyun Yoo <quic_jaehyoo@...cinc.com>
To:     Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Jamie Iles <quic_jiles@...cinc.com>,
        "Graeme Gregory" <quic_ggregory@...cinc.com>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] i2c: add tracepoints for I2C slave events

Hi Wolfram,

On 3/18/2022 3:53 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>> +	if (trace_i2c_slave_enabled() && !ret)
>> +		trace_i2c_slave(client, event, val);
> 
> Why '!ret'? I think we should always print 'ret' in the trace as well.
> Backends are allowed to send errnos on WRITE_RECEIVED to NACK the
> reception of a byte. This is useful information, too, or?

Ah, you are right. As itself should trace all events including NACK
cases, it'd be better to print out the 'ret' too. I'll add it to v3.

Thanks,
Jae