[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200724134811.01704cbf@oasis.local.home>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 13:48:11 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Oscar Carter <oscar.carter@....com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, Jann
Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] kernel/trace: Remove function callback casts
On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 13:40:20 -0400
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 13:36:56 -0400
> Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
>
> > Which BTW, is supported by the following architectures:
> > x86
Ah, you can lose support on x86 if you don't enable DYNAMIC_FTRACE,
which is stupid to do. I only enabled disabling of DYNAMIC_FTRACE on
x86 to test it, as not all architectures have it, and I currently only
test on x86.
Without DYNAMIC_FTRACE enabled, you *always* call into the ftrace
infrastructure for *every* function. This adds something like 15 to 20%
overhead to the kernel. Did I say it was stupid to do so?
If you are going through all this work because some randconfig causes
this warning because it enables CONFIG_FUNCTION_TRACER but without
DYNAMIC_FTRACE enabled, then I strongly suggest you start spending your
time elsewhere, because it will be a big NAK on my part to add all this
intrusive code for a config used only for debugging the non
DYNAMIC_FTRACE case.
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
