netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/4] sfc: add MCDI tracing

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]

Date:	Fri, 22 May 2015 15:03:49 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	ecree@...arflare.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-net-drivers@...arflare.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/4] sfc: add MCDI tracing

From: Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>
Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 15:49:46 +0100

> On 21/05/15 23:52, David Miller wrote:
>> All of this work to allocate the buffer, add messages to it, and dump it
>> to some user obtainable location duplicates existing infrastructure in
>> the kernel.
>> Please do not do this, and instead use the kernel's existing tracing
>> infrastructure to implement this.
> 
> The logging_buffer we allocate isn't there to store _messages_ for later
> dumping, it's a work area for constructing a _single_ message, which is
> then merely written to the system log with netif_info.  Thus, I don't see
> how it would make much difference if we used (say) ftrace instead of
> netif_info to ship the events to userspace.
> The reason the buffer is long-lived is simply to avoid the overhead of
> allocating and freeing it every MCDI call, since MCDIs are already known
> to be serialised for other reasons.
> Can you please further explain your objection and what you'd prefer us to
> do?

Ok fair enough, please repost your series, thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html