linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tracepoint: Allow livepatch module add trace event

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: <20221114122255.72588f45@gandalf.local.home>
Date:   Mon, 14 Nov 2022 12:23:06 -0500
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Jianlin Lv <iecedge@...il.com>
Cc:     alison.schofield@...el.com, davidgow@...gle.com,
        thunder.leizhen@...wei.com, jianlv@...y.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracepoint: Allow livepatch module add trace event

On Wed,  2 Nov 2022 16:02:36 +0000
Jianlin Lv <iecedge@...il.com> wrote:

> In the case of keeping the system running, the preferred method for
> tracing the kernel is dynamic tracing (kprobe), but the drawback of
> this method is that events are lost, especially when tracing packages
> in the network stack.

I'm not against this change, but the above is where I'm a bit confused. How
are events more likely to be lost with kprobes over a static event?

-- Steve