linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf: Fix "Track with sched_switch" test by not printing warnings in quiet mode

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: <CAM9d7cg+tTw5vTOycqRciQx8He-WLG0TSdcWa0tyzeu49DmgxA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 13 Oct 2022 09:57:38 -0700
From:   Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To:     James Clark <james.clark@....com>
Cc:     linux-perf-users <linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf: Fix "Track with sched_switch" test by not printing
 warnings in quiet mode

On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 10:12 AM James Clark <james.clark@....com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 12/10/2022 17:50, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 4:13 AM James Clark <james.clark@....com> wrote:
> >>> The test already supplies -q to run in quiet mode, so extend quiet mode
> >>> to perf_stdio__warning() and also ui__warning() for consistency.
> >
> > I'm not sure if suppressing the warnings with -q is a good thing.
> > Maybe we need to separate warning/debug messages from the output.
>
> I don't see the issue with warnings being suppressed in quiet mode as
> long as errors are still printed. In other cases warnings have already
> been suppressed by quiet mode and this site is the odd one out.
>
> What use case are you thinking of where someone explicitly adds -q but
> wants to see non fatal warnings?

I don't have any specific use case.  If it's already suppressed in other
cases, I'm fine with it.

Thanks,
Namhyung