linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] watchdog: Add tracing events for the most usual watchdog 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20221008155005.GA1733634@roeck-us.net>
Date:   Sat, 8 Oct 2022 08:50:05 -0700
From:   Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:     Uwe Kleine-König 
        <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>, linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        kernel@...gutronix.de, Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] watchdog: Add tracing events for the most usual
 watchdog events

On Wed, Oct 05, 2022 at 05:11:36PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Oct 2022 12:39:24 -0700
> Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
> 
> > > > Nit, but I would probably put the above TRACE_EVENT() below the two
> > > > DEFINE_EVENT()s below. That way we have all the DEFINE_EVENT()s for a
> > > > specific DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS() together. Otherwise people may get confused.  
> > > 
> > > I thought about that, too. The argument for the order I chose is that
> > > having start at the start and stop at the end is also intuitive.
> > > 
> > > But I don't care much and would let the watchdog guys decide what they
> > > prefer.
> > > 
> > > @Wim+Guenter: Feel free to reorder at application time or ask for a v3
> > > if this v2 doesn't fit your preference.  
> > 
> > For my part I would prefer a version with Steven's Reviewed-by: tag,
> > whatever it is.
> 
> I much rather have the DEFINE_EVENTS followed by the DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS()
> as that's what most people look for.
> 
> For start and stop being together, I believe that will not trip many people
> up, where as the DEFINE_EVENTS() scattering will.
> 

I agree. Uwe, please send v3 with those changes.

Thanks,
Guenter