linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] tracepoints: Add verifier that makes sure all defined tracepoints are used

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: <20250610091847.3b2aab45@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2025 09:18:47 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: "Masami Hiramatsu (Google)" <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Trace Kernel
 <linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Mathieu Desnoyers
 <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
 Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Lorenzo Stoakes
 <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>, Caleb Sander Mateos
 <csander@...estorage.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo
 Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Thomas Gleixner
 <tglx@...utronix.de>, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] tracepoints: Add verifier that makes sure all
 defined tracepoints are used

On Tue, 10 Jun 2025 14:53:05 +0900
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@...nel.org> wrote:

> > 
> > diff --git a/include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h b/include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h
> > index fa5f19b8d53a..600d8b51e315 100644
> > --- a/include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h
> > +++ b/include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h
> > @@ -708,6 +708,7 @@ defined(CONFIG_AUTOFDO_CLANG) || defined(CONFIG_PROPELLER_CLANG)
> >  	MCOUNT_REC()							\
> >  	*(.init.rodata .init.rodata.*)					\
> >  	FTRACE_EVENTS()							\
> > +	BOUNDED_SECTION_BY(__tracepoint_check, ___tracepoint_check)	\  
> 
> nit: Shouldn't we also make this as TRACEPOINT_CHECKS() ?
> 
> Others looks good to me.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@...nel.org>

In my "build time check" it requires these to be there even if it's not
used. It's how it determines if it's not used by seeing if this section is
empty.

So I need it not to be an option.

-- Steve