netdev - Re: [Patch net-next 02/13] ipv4: introduce tracepoint trace_ip_queue

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 11 Aug 2021 17:37:35 -0700
From:   Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To:     Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Qitao Xu <qitao.xu@...edance.com>,
        Cong Wang <cong.wang@...edance.com>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch net-next 02/13] ipv4: introduce tracepoint trace_ip_queue_xmit()

On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 4:08 PM Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com> wrote:
> Some of the function names are hardly changed.

This is obviously wrong for two reasons:

1. Kernel developers did change them. As a quick example,
tcp_retransmit_skb() has been changed, we do have reasons to only trace
__tcp_retransmit_skb() instead.

2. Even if kernel developers never did, compilers can do inline too. For
example, I see nothing to stop compiler to inline tcp_transmit_skb()
which is static and only calls __tcp_transmit_skb(). You explicitly
mark bpf_fentry_test1() as noinline, don't you?

I understand you are eager to promote ebpf, however, please keep
reasonable on facts.

Thanks.