linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 03/11] sched: Add sched tracepoints for RV task model

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: <20250211143707.GH29593@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2025 15:37:07 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Gabriele Monaco <gmonaco@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
	linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 03/11] sched: Add sched tracepoints for RV task model

On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 01:54:44PM +0100, Gabriele Monaco wrote:

> > > +void do_trace_set_current_state(int state_value)
> > > +{
> > > + trace_sched_set_state_tp(current, current->__state, state_value);
> > 
> > Should this be:
> > 
> >  __do_trace_sched_set_state_tp() ?
> > 
> 
> Mmh, you mean avoiding the static_branch_unlikely in the helper
> function, since it's supposed to be used before calling it?

Yep, seems pointless to repeat that.

> > > +}
> > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(do_trace_set_current_state);
> > 
> > _GPL
> > 
> 
> I'm absolutely not against this change but, out of curiosity, would
> that imply non-GPL modules are not going to be able to sleep going
> forward? At least not using this pattern.

Bah, you're right. Killing non-GPL modules seems like a worthy goal
though, but perhaps another day ;-)