lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Dec]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] perf lock: Fix output of tracing lock events
From
Date
On Thu, 2009-12-17 at 11:09 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> > > TP_STRUCT__entry(
> > > + __field(struct lockdep_map *, lockdep_addr)
> > > __field(unsigned int, flags)
> > > __string(name, lock->name)
> > > ),
> >
> > I feel a bit awkward explicitly leaking kernel pointers like that. All this
> > is accessible by root only (for now) so its not too harmfull, but sitll.
>
> What would you suggest as a 'natural lock class key'? The name? It might not
> be unique enough.
>
> Other kernel objects like tasks, cpus, inodes, pages all have some natural key
> that isnt a kernel pointer - but locks are a bit special.

Well, yeah, that's the problem, and we use the pointer for exactly this
purpose inside the kernel too, its just that its a blatant data leak
when we expose it to userspace like that.

On the other hand, adding some ID generation just so we can expose it
seems silly too.

Why do we need to have instance resolution?



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-12-17 11:29    [W:0.085 / U:31.060 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site