linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] tracing: Use guard() rather than scoped

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: <20241125142656.GH38837@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2024 15:26:56 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Michael Jeanson <mjeanson@...icios.com>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
	"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
	Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
	Jordan Rife <jrife@...gle.com>, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] tracing: Use guard() rather than scoped_guard()

On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 09:25:14AM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> Using scoped_guard() in the implementation of trace_##name() adds an
> unnecessary level of indentation.
> 

> diff --git a/include/linux/tracepoint.h b/include/linux/tracepoint.h
> index b2633a72e871..e398f6e43f61 100644
> --- a/include/linux/tracepoint.h
> +++ b/include/linux/tracepoint.h
> @@ -259,8 +259,8 @@ static inline struct tracepoint *tracepoint_ptr_deref(tracepoint_ptr_t *p)
>  	{								\
>  		if (static_branch_unlikely(&__tracepoint_##name.key)) { \
>  			if (cond) {					\
> -				scoped_guard(preempt_notrace)		\
> -					__DO_TRACE_CALL(name, TP_ARGS(args)); \
> +				guard(preempt_notrace)();		\
> +				__DO_TRACE_CALL(name, TP_ARGS(args));	\
>  			}						\
>  		}							\
>  		if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_LOCKDEP) && (cond)) {		\
> @@ -275,8 +275,8 @@ static inline struct tracepoint *tracepoint_ptr_deref(tracepoint_ptr_t *p)
>  	{								\
>  		might_fault();						\
>  		if (static_branch_unlikely(&__tracepoint_##name.key)) {	\
> -			scoped_guard(rcu_tasks_trace)			\
> -				__DO_TRACE_CALL(name, TP_ARGS(args));	\
> +			guard(rcu_tasks_trace)();			\
> +			__DO_TRACE_CALL(name, TP_ARGS(args));		\
>  		}							\
>  		if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_LOCKDEP)) {			\
>  			WARN_ONCE(!rcu_is_watching(),			\

Yeah, that also works.