linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next] net/sock: Introduce trace_sk_data

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:   Sat, 15 Oct 2022 13:26:48 -0700
From:   Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To:     Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
Cc:     cong.wang@...edance.com, davem@...emloft.net, dsahern@...nel.org,
        kuba@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, peilin.ye@...edance.com,
        yepeilin.cs@...il.com, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net/sock: Introduce trace_sk_data_ready()

On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 1:07 PM Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 09:19:34AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > Second patch adding the tracing point once in the helper ?
> >
> > Alternatively, why not add the tracepoint directly in the called
> > functions (we have few of them),
> > instead of all call points ?
>
> Why do we want to give implementations of sk_data_ready() freedom
> to not to call this trace_sk_data_ready()?
>
> Thanks.

I proposed an alternative. Choose one, but not the one you do not like :/

The first proposition was to split the patch in a more logical way.

I think we have less sk_data_ready() functions than call sites, so
code size would be smaller,
but this is probably something we care about enough.