linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/8] ftrace: Replace uses of _ftrace_direct APIs with _ftrace_direct

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: <20230207103519.1f0ef013@gandalf.local.home>
Date:   Tue, 7 Feb 2023 10:35:19 -0500
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Florent Revest <revest@...omium.org>
Cc:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
        catalin.marinas@....com, will@...nel.org, mhiramat@...nel.org,
        ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, andrii@...nel.org,
        kpsingh@...nel.org, jolsa@...nel.org, xukuohai@...weicloud.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] ftrace: Replace uses of _ftrace_direct APIs with
 _ftrace_direct_multi

On Tue, 7 Feb 2023 16:21:49 +0100
Florent Revest <revest@...omium.org> wrote:

> Actually, I'm not sure anymore if we should delete the !multi samples...
> 
> I realized that they are also used as part of the ftrace selftests in:
> - tools/testing/selftests/ftrace/test.d/direct/ftrace-direct.tc
> - tools/testing/selftests/ftrace/test.d/direct/kprobe-direct.tc
> 
> It does not really make sense to use the ftrace-direct-muti sample as
> a drop-in replacement for the ftrace-direct sample there since they
> don't really do the same thing so we would either need to change the
> test a bit or the multi sample.
> Also, we would still need to adapt the ftrace-direct-too sample since
> it has no multi equivalent and is required there.

Let's not delete the samples, and they do test slightly different use cases
(although the code may be somewhat the same). I rather still keep that test
coverage.

-- Steve