linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] tracing: Fix some selftest issues

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]

Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 09:57:46 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: "Masami Hiramatsu (Google)" <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc: Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@...ux.intel.com>, LKML
 <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Trace Kernel
 <linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] tracing: Fix some selftest issues

On Fri, 31 May 2024 23:20:47 +0900
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@...nel.org> wrote:

> The major conflict happens when the boot-time test cleans up the kprobe
> events by
> 
>   dyn_events_release_all(&trace_kprobe_ops);
> 
> And I removed it by [3/3] patch in this series :) because it does not
> needed and not confirmed there is no other kprobe events when the test
> starts. Also the warning message are redundant so I removed it by [2/3].
> 
> So without this [1/3], if we apply [2/3] and [3/3], the problem will be
> mitigated, but I think the root cause is that these modules are built-in.

I'm OK with making them module only, but I don't see any selftests for
sythetic events. I think they should have a boot up test as well. If we
remove them, let's add something to test them at boot up. Then the boot up
code could clean it up.

Or change the test module to be a boot up test that cleans itself up if it
is compiled in as not a module?

-- Steve