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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 7 Feb 2023 17:19:18 +0100
From:   Florent Revest <revest@...omium.org>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.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, Feb 7, 2023 at 4:35 PM Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
>
> 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

Ack :) Thanks Steve!

I'll undo the work I've started to do on this and send a v2 shortly afterward.