linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 05/24] tracing: Add events to trace remotes

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]

Message-ID: <aCGpchGnvyFpWk2y@google.com>
Date: Mon, 12 May 2025 08:55:30 +0100
From: Vincent Donnefort <vdonnefort@...gle.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: mhiramat@...nel.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
	linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, maz@...nel.org,
	oliver.upton@...ux.dev, joey.gouly@....com, suzuki.poulose@....com,
	yuzenghui@...wei.com, kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, jstultz@...gle.com,
	qperret@...gle.com, will@...nel.org, kernel-team@...roid.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 05/24] tracing: Add events to trace remotes

On Fri, May 09, 2025 at 03:47:35PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue,  6 May 2025 17:48:01 +0100
> Vincent Donnefort <vdonnefort@...gle.com> wrote:
> 
> > diff --git a/include/linux/trace_remote_event.h b/include/linux/trace_remote_event.h
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..621c5dff0664
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/include/linux/trace_remote_event.h
> > @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
> > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
> > +
> > +#ifndef _LINUX_TRACE_REMOTE_EVENTS_H
> > +#define _LINUX_TRACE_REMOTE_EVENTS_H
> > +
> > +struct trace_remote;
> > +struct trace_event_fields;
> > +
> > +struct remote_event_hdr {
> > +	unsigned short	id;
> > +};
> > +
> > +#define REMOTE_EVENT_NAME_MAX 29
> 
> 29 is a particularly strange number. It's not even divisible by
> sizeof(short). This will leave a hole in the remote_event structure.
> 
> Should it be "30" to plug up that one byte space between name and "id"?

Ha yes 30 is what it should be!

> 
> -- Steve
> 
> > +struct remote_event {
> > +	char				name[REMOTE_EVENT_NAME_MAX];
> > +	unsigned short			id;
> > +	bool				enabled;
> > +	struct trace_remote		*remote;
> > +	struct trace_event_fields	*fields;
> > +	char				*print_fmt;
> > +	void				(*print)(void *evt, struct trace_seq *seq);
> > +};