linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] kernel/trace: Fix cleanup logic of enable_trace

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]

Message-ID: <20230630064554.3d1df048@rorschach.local.home>
Date:   Fri, 30 Jun 2023 06:45:54 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Tzvetomir Stoyanov <tz.stoyanov@...il.com>
Cc:     mhiramat@...nel.org, dan.carpenter@...aro.org,
        linux-trace-devel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel/trace: Fix cleanup logic of enable_trace_eprobe

On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 12:57:36 +0300
Tzvetomir Stoyanov <tz.stoyanov@...il.com> wrote:

> > Does that make sense?  
> 
> Yes, it makes sense. But the original loop will break on the first
> failure.  If there is an error (ret is not 0) and at least one eprobe
> was enabled successfully (enabled is true),
> the warning should be emitted, only if that error is not ENOMEM:
>                                   WARN_ON_ONCE(ret != -ENOMEM);

Ah, I missed the logic for the "enabled" variable. Yeah, when that is
set it does the same as the cnt variable I mentioned. Thanks for
pointing that out. (I blame still being a bit jetlagged and lack of
sleep for not seeing that ;-)

Yeah, if "enabled" is set, then we can do the WARN_ON_ONCE().

I'll wait for your new patch.

Thanks Tzvetomir!

-- Steve