linux-kernel - Re: Question about 'for_each_kernel

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: <20221021083254.3c879824@rorschach.local.home>
Date:   Fri, 21 Oct 2022 08:32:54 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     richard clark <richard.xnu.clark@...il.com>
Cc:     bristot@...nel.org, linux-trace-devel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Question about 'for_each_kernel_tracepoint(...)' function

On Fri, 21 Oct 2022 11:51:20 +0800
richard clark <richard.xnu.clark@...il.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 10:12 AM Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 21 Oct 2022 09:43:14 +0800
> > richard clark <richard.xnu.clark@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> >  
> > > Ah, as you can see that I did it, but the result is not what I
> > > expected :-). Help?  
> >
> > Looking at the code, I see it does indeed only look at builtin tracepoints.  
> 
> What the logic behind is not to implement a function like
> 'for_each_tracepoints' instead of 'for_each_kernel_tracepoint' to find
> all the TPs defined by both builtin kernel and external kernel
> modules, just like we can find all the kernel symbols and exported
> symbols from external module?

Why? It's not needed upstream. If you push your code upstream and it's
something to get accepted, then we can think about adding that.

> 
> >
> > But if you want one module to have access to the tracepoints of another,
> > then you can have the first one export it.
> >
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_TRACEPOINT_GPL(function_event_a);
> >
> > And then module b should have access to it.
> >  
> Yes, but module b needs to register a new probe call back function for
> the new TPs defined by module a in my case, so first it needs to find
> the TPs defined by module a. Any comments?

No, because I have no idea what you are doing or why you need this.

-- Steve