(in target_1)
ENTRY #5: 0x75922c (in caller)
ENTRY #6: 0x6f8f39
ENTRY #7: 0x6fa6f0
ENTRY #8: 0x7f986adc4cd0
Now there is a logical and complete sequence of function calls.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko
---
.../bpf/prog_tests/uretprobe_stack.c | 186 ++
.../selftests/bpf/progs
ing frame
pointer-based logic.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko
---
arch/x86/events/core.c | 20
include/linux/uprobes.h | 2 ++
kernel/events/uprobes.c | 2 ++
3 files changed, 24 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/x86/events/core.c b/arch/x86/events/core.c
index 5b0dd07b1ef1..82d
im
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko
---
kernel/events/callchain.c | 43 ++-
kernel/events/uprobes.c | 9
2 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/events/callchain.c b/kernel/events/callchain.c
index 1273be84392c..b17e3323f
This helper is needed in another file, so make it a bit more uniquely
named and expose it internally.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko
---
include/linux/uprobes.h | 1 +
kernel/events/uprobes.c | 6 +++---
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/uprobes.h b
selftests changes and can go in
through non-BPF tree without the risk of merge conflicts.
Patches are based on latest linux-trace/probes/for-next.
v1->v2:
- fixed GCC aggressively inlining test_uretprobe_stack() function (BPF CI);
- fixed comments (Peter).
Andrii Nakryiko (4):
uprobes: ren
prepare uprobe args buffer lazily")
Reported-by: Breno Leitao
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko
---
kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c | 14 +-
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
index 8541fa1494ae..
On Mon, May 20, 2024 at 8:20 AM Jiri Olsa wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 08:32:30AM -0600, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 3:30 AM Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, May 08, 2024 at 02:26:03PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wro
On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 3:30 AM Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 08, 2024 at 02:26:03PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
>
> > +static void fixup_uretprobe_trampoline_entries(struct perf_callchain_entry
> > *entry,
> > +
(in target_1)
ENTRY #5: 0x75922c (in caller)
ENTRY #6: 0x6f8f39
ENTRY #7: 0x6fa6f0
ENTRY #8: 0x7f986adc4cd0
Now there is a logical and complete sequence of function calls.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko
---
.../bpf/prog_tests/uretprobe_stack.c | 185 ++
.../selftests/bpf/progs
ing frame
pointer-based logic.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko
---
arch/x86/events/core.c | 20
include/linux/uprobes.h | 2 ++
kernel/events/uprobes.c | 2 ++
3 files changed, 24 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/x86/events/core.c b/arch/x86/events/core.c
index 5b0dd07b1ef1..82d
ne
address entries with correct original return address. This is done only
if there are pending uretprobes for current task.
Reported-by: Riham Selim
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko
---
kernel/events/callchain.c | 42 ++-
kernel/events/uprobes.c | 9
This helper is needed in another file, so make it a bit more uniquely
named and expose it internally.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko
---
include/linux/uprobes.h | 1 +
kernel/events/uprobes.c | 6 +++---
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/uprobes.h b
selftests, is isolated from any other BPF selftests changes and can go in
through non-BPF tree without the risk of merge conflicts.
Patches are based on latest linux-trace's probes/for-next branch.
Andrii Nakryiko (4):
uprobes: rename get_trampoline_vaddr() and make it global
perf,uprobes: fix user
On Sun, May 5, 2024 at 9:13 AM syzbot
wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> syzbot found the following issue on:
>
> HEAD commit:a9e7715ce8b3 libbpf: Avoid casts from pointers to enums in..
> git tree: bpf-next
> console+strace: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=153c1dc498
> kernel config:
On Wed, May 1, 2024 at 7:06 PM Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>
> On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 09:29:40 -0700
> Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 6:32 AM Masami Hiramatsu
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 13:25:04 -0700
> > > A
44
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/uprobe_syscall_executed.c
>
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/uprobe_syscall.c
> b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/uprobe_syscall.c
> index 1a50cd35205d..3ef324c2db50 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selfte
On Thu, May 2, 2024 at 1:04 PM Jiri Olsa wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 09:43:02AM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > On Thu, May 2, 2024 at 5:23 AM Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > >
> > > hi,
> > > as part of the effort on speeding up the uprobes [0] comin
On Thu, May 2, 2024 at 5:23 AM Jiri Olsa wrote:
>
> hi,
> as part of the effort on speeding up the uprobes [0] coming with
> return uprobe optimization by using syscall instead of the trap
> on the uretprobe trampoline.
>
> The speed up depends on instruction type that uprobe is installed
> and
_opts, opts,
> + .retprobe = true,
> + );
> + struct uprobe_syscall_executed *skel;
> + int err, go[2], pid, c, status;
> +
> + if (pipe(go))
> + return;
ASSERT_OK() missing, like in the previous patch
Thanks for switching to pipe() + global variable instead of using trace_pipe.
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko
> +
> + skel = uprobe_syscall_executed__open_and_load();
> + if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "uprobe_syscall_executed__open_and_load"))
> + goto cleanup;
> +
[...]
all(void)
> +{
> + LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_uprobe_multi_opts, opts,
> + .retprobe = true,
> + );
> + struct uprobe_syscall_executed *skel;
> + int pid, status, err, go[2], c;
> +
> + if (pipe(go))
> + return;
very unlikely to fail, but still, ASSERT_OK() would be in order here
But regardless:
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko
[...]
On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 6:32 AM Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>
> On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 13:25:04 -0700
> Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 6:51 AM Masami Hiramatsu
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Andrii,
> > >
> > > On
On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 5:02 PM Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
>
> At the lowest level, rethook-based kretprobes on x86-64 architecture go
> through arch_rethoook_trampoline() function, manually written in
> assembly, which calls into a simple arch_rethook_trampoline_callback()
> functio
On Sun, Apr 28, 2024 at 4:25 PM Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> On Thu, 25 Apr 2024 13:31:53 -0700
> Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
>
> I'm just coming back from Japan (work and then a vacation), and
> catching up on my email during the 6 hour layover in Detroit.
>
> > Hey Mas
On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 6:51 AM Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>
> Hi Andrii,
>
> On Thu, 25 Apr 2024 13:31:53 -0700
> Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
>
> > Hey Masami,
> >
> > I can't really review most of that code as I'm completely unfamiliar
> > with all those inne
On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 12:39 AM Jiri Olsa wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 11:06:53AM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 12:43 PM Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > >
> > > Adding test that adds return uprobe inside 32 bit task
> > > and ve
On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 12:33 AM Jiri Olsa wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 11:03:29AM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 12:43 PM Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > >
> > > Adding test to verify that when called from outside of the
> > > tramp
On Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 12:43 PM Jiri Olsa wrote:
>
> Adding test that adds return uprobe inside 32 bit task
> and verify the return uprobe and attached bpf programs
> get properly executed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa
> ---
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/.gitignore| 1 +
>
See nits below, but overall LGTM
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko
[...]
> @@ -219,6 +301,11 @@ static void test_uretprobe_regs_change(void)
> {
> test__skip();
> }
> +
> +static void test_uretprobe_syscall_call(void)
> +{
> + test__skip();
> +}
>
uprobe (and uretprobe) kind is determined by which instruction
> is being patched with breakpoint instruction. That's also important
> for uretprobes, because uprobe is installed for each uretprobe.
>
> The performance test is part of bpf selftests:
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/run_benc
4 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
LGTM
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko
> diff --git a/arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_64.tbl
> b/arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_64.tbl
> index 7e8d46f4147f..af0a33ab06ee 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_64.tbl
> +++ b/arch
On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 7:25 AM Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>
> Hi Andrii,
>
> On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 14:52:12 -0700
> Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
>
> > Improve objpool (used heavily in kretprobe hot path) performance with two
> > improvements:
> > - inlini
On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 5:49 AM Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Here is the 9th version of the series to re-implement the fprobe on
> function-graph tracer. The previous version is;
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/170887410337.564249.6360118840946697039.stgit@devnote2/
>
> This
On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 6:25 AM Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
wrote:
>
> From: Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
>
> Skip recording calltime and rettime if the fgraph_ops does not need it.
> This is a kind of performance optimization for fprobe. Since the fprobe
> user does not use these entries, recording
On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 6:22 AM Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
wrote:
>
> From: Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
>
> Enable kprobe_multi feature if CONFIG_FPROBE is enabled. The pt_regs is
> converted from ftrace_regs by ftrace_partial_regs(), thus some registers
> may always returns 0. But it should be
change is acceptable and whether I should complete it
with 32-bit "inlining" as well. Thanks!
[0]
https://nakryiko.com/posts/retsnoop-intro/#peering-deep-into-functions-with-lbr
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko
---
arch/x86/kernel/asm-offsets_64.c | 4
arch/x8
-multi: 10.440 ± 0.108M/s
AFTER
=
kretprobe : 10.106 ± 0.120M/s (+1.7%)
kretprobe-multi: 10.515 ± 0.180M/s (+0.7%)
Cc: Matt (Qiang) Wu
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko
---
include/linux/objpool.h | 6 +++---
lib/objpool.c | 12 ++--
2 files changed, 9 insertions
: 10.440 ± 0.108M/s (+2.2%)
Cc: Matt (Qiang) Wu
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko
---
include/linux/objpool.h | 101 +++-
lib/objpool.c | 100 ---
2 files changed, 99 insertions(+), 102 deletions(-)
diff --git
kprobes and
kretprobes with BPF-based benchmarks. See individual patches for details and
results.
Andrii Nakryiko (2):
objpool: enable inlining objpool_push() and objpool_pop() operations
objpool: cache nr_possible_cpus() and avoid caching nr_cpu_ids
include/linux/objpool.h | 105
On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 6:00 PM Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>
> On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 12:09:09 -0700
> Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
>
> > Take into account CONFIG_FTRACE_VALIDATE_RCU_IS_WATCHING when validating
> > that RCU is watching when trying to setup rethooko on a function en
://lore.kernel.org/bpf/caef4bzauq2wkmjzdc9s0rbwa01bybgwhn6andxqshyia47p...@mail.gmail.com/
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko
---
kernel/trace/rethook.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/trace/rethook.c b/kernel/trace/rethook.c
index fa03094e9e69..a974605ad7a5 100644
--- a/kernel
/bpf/caef4bzauq2wkmjzdc9s0rbwa01bybgwhn6andxqshyia47p...@mail.gmail.com/
Cc: Steven Rostedt
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu
Cc: Paul E. McKenney
Acked-by: Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko
---
include/linux/trace_recursion.h | 2 +-
kernel/trace/Kconfig| 13
On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 3:48 PM Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>
> On Wed, 3 Apr 2024 15:03:28 -0700
> Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
>
> > Take into account CONFIG_FTRACE_VALIDATE_RCU_IS_WATCHING when validating
> > that RCU is watching when trying to setup rethooko on a function ent
On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 1:25 AM Jiri Olsa wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 11:33:00AM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
>
> SNIP
>
> > #include
> > #include
> > @@ -308,6 +309,88 @@ static int uprobe_init_insn(struct arch_uprobe
> > *auprobe, struct insn *insn, bool
> > }
> >
> > #ifdef
On Fri, Apr 5, 2024 at 8:41 PM Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 22:21:00 -0700
> Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 9:00 PM Andrii Nakryiko
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 5:52 PM Steven Rostedt wrote:
&
On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 5:58 PM Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>
> On Wed, 3 Apr 2024 09:58:12 -0700
> Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 7:09 AM Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, 3 Apr 2024 11:47:41 +0200
> > > Jiri Olsa wrote
%, according to BPF benchmarks ([0]).
[0]
https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/caef4bzauq2wkmjzdc9s0rbwa01bybgwhn6andxqshyia47p...@mail.gmail.com/
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko
---
kernel/trace/rethook.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/trace/rethook.c b/kernel/trace/rethook.c
/bpf/caef4bzauq2wkmjzdc9s0rbwa01bybgwhn6andxqshyia47p...@mail.gmail.com/
Cc: Steven Rostedt
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu
Cc: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko
---
include/linux/trace_recursion.h | 2 +-
kernel/trace/Kconfig| 13 +
2 files changed, 14 insertions
On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 4:05 AM Jonthan Haslam wrote:
>
> > > > > Given the discussion around per-cpu rw semaphore and need for
> > > > > (internal) batched attachment API for uprobes, do you think you can
> > > > > apply this patch as is for now? We can then gain initial improvements
> > > > > in
On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 7:09 AM Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>
> On Wed, 3 Apr 2024 11:47:41 +0200
> Jiri Olsa wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 10:07:08AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > > Hi Jiri,
> > >
> > > On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 11:33:00 +0200
> > > Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > >
> > > > Adding
On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 9:00 PM Andrii Nakryiko
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 5:52 PM Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 3 Apr 2024 09:40:48 +0900
> > Masami Hiramatsu (Google) wrote:
> >
> > > OK, for me, this last sentence is preferred for
On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 5:52 PM Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> On Wed, 3 Apr 2024 09:40:48 +0900
> Masami Hiramatsu (Google) wrote:
>
> > OK, for me, this last sentence is preferred for the help message. That
> > explains
> > what this is for.
> >
> > All callbacks that attach to the function
_running(tsk))
> return 0;
>
This should probably go through Masami's tree, but the change makes
sense to me, given this is an expected condition.
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko
> do {
> --
> 2.34.1
>
>
On Mon, Apr 1, 2024 at 5:38 PM Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>
> On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 12:09:18 -0400
> Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 20:25:52 +0900
> > Masami Hiramatsu (Google) wrote:
> >
> > > > Masami,
> > > >
> > > > Are you OK with just keeping it set to N.
> > >
> > > OK, if it
of ftrace subsystem. For most users it should
probably be kept disabled to eliminate unnecessary runtime overhead.
Cc: Steven Rostedt
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu
Cc: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko
---
include/linux/trace_recursion.h | 2 +-
kernel/trace/Kconfig| 14
On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 5:36 PM Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>
> On Fri, 29 Mar 2024 10:33:57 -0700
> Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 5:45 PM Andrii Nakryiko
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 5:18 PM Masami Hiramatsu
&
On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 5:45 PM Andrii Nakryiko
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 5:18 PM Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:06:01 +
> > Jonthan Haslam wrote:
> >
> > > > > Masami,
> > > > >
> &g
On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 11:58 AM Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 09:16:33 -0700
> Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
>
> > > It's no different than lockdep. Test boxes should have it enabled, but
> > > there's no reason to have this enabled in a production system.
On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 5:18 PM Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:06:01 +
> Jonthan Haslam wrote:
>
> > > > Masami,
> > > >
> > > > Given the discussion around per-cpu rw semaphore and need for
> > > > (internal) batched attachment API for uprobes, do you think you can
> > >
On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 3:11 PM Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> On Mon, 25 Mar 2024 11:38:48 +0900
> Masami Hiramatsu (Google) wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 22 Mar 2024 09:03:23 -0700
> > Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> >
> > > Introduce CONFIG_FTRACE_VALIDATE_RCU_IS_WATCHING
On Sun, Mar 24, 2024 at 8:03 PM Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>
> On Thu, 21 Mar 2024 07:57:35 -0700
> Jonathan Haslam wrote:
>
> > Active uprobes are stored in an RB tree and accesses to this tree are
> > dominated by read operations. Currently these accesses are serialized by
> > a spinlock but this
On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 10:27 AM Andrii Nakryiko
wrote:
>
> On Sun, Mar 24, 2024 at 5:07 PM Alexei Starovoitov
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Andrii,
> >
> > syzbot found UAF in raw_tp cookie series in bpf-next.
> > Reverting the whole merge
> > 2e244a72cd
On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 12:12 PM Jonthan Haslam
wrote:
>
> Hi Ingo,
>
> > > This change has been tested against production workloads that exhibit
> > > significant contention on the spinlock and an almost order of magnitude
> > > reduction for mean uprobe execution time is observed (28 -> 3.5
>
On Sun, Mar 24, 2024 at 5:07 PM Alexei Starovoitov
wrote:
>
> Hi Andrii,
>
> syzbot found UAF in raw_tp cookie series in bpf-next.
> Reverting the whole merge
> 2e244a72cd48 ("Merge branch 'bpf-raw-tracepoint-support-for-bpf-cookie'")
>
> fixes the issue.
>
> Pls take a look.
> See C reproducer
On Sun, Mar 24, 2024 at 7:38 PM Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>
> On Fri, 22 Mar 2024 09:03:23 -0700
> Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
>
> > Introduce CONFIG_FTRACE_VALIDATE_RCU_IS_WATCHING config option to
> > control whether ftrace low-level code performs additional
> > rcu_
with extra config to let users decide if they are willing to
pay the price.
Cc: Steven Rostedt
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu
Cc: Paul E. McKenney
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko
---
include/linux/trace_recursion.h | 2 +-
kernel/trace/Kconfig| 13 +
2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 1
, I think we'll want to backport this ASAP to some of
the old kernels we have. Thanks!
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko
>
> This change has been tested against production workloads that exhibit
> significant contention on the spinlock and an almost order of magnitude
> reduction for mean
On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 9:21 PM Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 11:17:25 -0700
> Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
>
> > This patch set implements two speed ups for uprobe/uretprobe runtime
> > execution
> > path for some common scenarios:
tions.
[0] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20240313131926.ga19...@redhat.com/
Reviewed-by: Jiri Olsa
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko
---
kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c | 10 +++---
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
Reviewed-by: Jiri Olsa
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko
---
kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c | 49 +
1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
index 9bffaab448a6..b5da95240a31 100644
was duplicated across uprobe_dispatcher and uretprobe_dispatcher,
and now will be centralized. All this is also in preparation to make
this uprobe_cpu_buffer handling logic optional in the next patch.
Reviewed-by: Jiri Olsa
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko
---
kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c | 78
nch of tracing tree, hopefully I guessed right;
- simplified user_cpu_buffer usage further (Oleg Nesterov);
- simplified patch #3, just moved speculative check outside of lock (Oleg);
- added Reviewed-by from Jiri Olsa.
Andrii Nakryiko (3):
uprobes: encapsulate preparation of uprobe args buf
On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 2:41 AM Jiri Olsa wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 02:02:30PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > This patch set implements two speed ups for uprobe/uretprobe runtime
> > execution
> > path for some common scenarios: BPF-only uprobes (patches #
this).
>
> On 03/12, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> >
> > This patch adds a speculative check before grabbing that rwlock. If
> > nr_systemwide is non-zero, lock is skipped and event is passed through.
> > From examining existing logic it looks correct and safe to do.
On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 8:48 AM Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> Again, looks good to me, but I have a minor nit. Feel free to ignore.
>
> On 03/12, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> >
> > static void __uprobe_trace_func(struct trace_uprobe *tu,
> >
On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 8:16 AM Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> LGTM, one nit below.
>
> On 03/12, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> >
> > +static struct uprobe_cpu_buffer *prepare_uprobe_buffer(struct trace_uprobe
> > *tu,
> > +
in this patch set.
As can be seen, we get about 4% - 10% speed up, in total, with both lazy
uprobe buffer and speculative filter check optimizations.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko
---
kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c | 4
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c b
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko
---
kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c | 56 ++---
1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
index a0f60bb10158..f2875349d124 100644
--- a/kernel/trace
was duplicated across uprobe_dispatcher and uretprobe_dispatcher,
and now will be centralized. All this is also in preparation to make
this uprobe_cpu_buffer handling logic optional in the next patch.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko
---
kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c | 75
.
Andrii Nakryiko (3):
uprobes: encapsulate preparation of uprobe args buffer
uprobes: prepare uprobe args buffer lazily
uprobes: add speculative lockless system-wide uprobe filter check
kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c | 103 ++--
1 file changed, 63 insertions(+), 40
-
> kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c | 112
> ++-
> 1 file changed, 68 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-)
>
LGTM.
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko
> diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c
> index e834f149695b..90cf2219adb4 100644
> --- a/kernel/trace/trace_kpro
to
kallsyms_on_each_match_symbol() to perform a proper counting.
Cc: Francis Laniel
Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu
Cc: Steven Rostedt
Fixes: b022f0c7e404 ("tracing/kprobes: Return EADDRNOTAVAIL when func matches
several symbols")
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko
---
kernel/trace/trace_kpr
On Fri, Oct 13, 2023 at 7:00 AM Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> On Fri, 13 Oct 2023 08:01:34 +0200
> Artem Savkov wrote:
>
> > > But looking at [0] and briefly reading some of the discussions you,
> > > Steven, had. I'm just wondering if it would be best to avoid
> > > increasing struct trace_entry
On Thu, Oct 12, 2023 at 6:43 AM Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 13:45:50 +0200
> Artem Savkov wrote:
>
> > linux-rt-devel tree contains a patch (b1773eac3f29c ("sched: Add support
> > for lazy preemption")) that adds an extra member to struct trace_entry.
> > This causes the offset
On Mon, Oct 2, 2023 at 6:53 AM Artem Savkov wrote:
>
> linux-rt-devel tree contains a patch that adds an extra member to struct
can you please point to the patch itself that makes that change?
> trace_entry. This causes the offset of args field in struct
> trace_event_raw_sys_enter be different
On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 8:45 AM Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote:
>
> This patch adds a test for BPF_SK_REUSEPORT_SELECT_OR_MIGRATE and
> removes 'static' from settimeo() in network_helpers.c.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kuniyuki Iwashima
> ---
Almost everything in prog_tests/migrate_reuseport.c should be
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 5:18 AM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
wrote:
>
> This adds some basic tests for the low level bpf_tc_cls_* API.
>
> Reviewed-by: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
> Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
> ---
> .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_tc_bpf.c| 112 ++
>
f/prog_tests/snprintf.c
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_snprintf.c
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_snprintf_single.c
>
> --
> 2.31.1.368.gbe11c130af-goog
>
Looks great, thank you!
For the series:
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 11:54 AM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> The "positive" part tests all format specifiers when things go well.
>
> The "negative" part makes sure that incorrect format strings fail at
> load time.
>
> Signed-off-by: Florent Revest
> ---
> .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/snprintf.c
string length
> arg.
>
> Because the format-string is known at verification time, we also do
> a first pass of format string validation in the verifier logic. This
> makes debugging easier.
>
> Signed-off-by: Florent Revest
> ---
LGTM.
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko
>
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 2:33 AM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 2:38 AM Andrii Nakryiko
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 11:54 AM Florent Revest wrote:
> > > +static int try_get_fmt_tmp_buf(char **tmp_buf)
> > > +{
> >
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 3:10 PM Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>
> On 4/15/21 1:58 AM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 4:32 PM Daniel Borkmann
> > wrote:
> >> On 4/15/21 1:19 AM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 3:51
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 8:57 AM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>
> Andrii Nakryiko writes:
>
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 3:51 PM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Andrii Nakryiko writes:
> >>
> >> > On Wed, A
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 11:54 AM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> Two helpers (trace_printk and seq_printf) have very similar
> implementations of format string parsing and a third one is coming
> (snprintf). To avoid code duplication and make the code easier to
> maintain, this moves the operations
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 11:58 AM Martin KaFai Lau wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 05:56:32PM +0200, Florent Revest wrote:
> > It is just missing a ';'. This macro is not used by any test yet.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Florent Revest
> Fixes: 22ba36351631 ("selftests/bpf: Move and extend
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 4:32 PM Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>
> On 4/15/21 1:19 AM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 3:51 PM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
> > wrote:
> >> Andrii Nakryiko writes:
> >>> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 3:58 AM Toke Høiland
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 3:51 PM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>
> Andrii Nakryiko writes:
>
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 3:58 AM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Andrii Nakryiko writes:
> >>
> >> > On Tue,
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 11:30 AM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> Hey Geert! :)
>
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 8:02 PM Geert Uytterhoeven
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 9:41 AM Andrii Nakryiko
> > wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 8:38 AM Florent Reves
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 2:46 AM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 1:16 AM Andrii Nakryiko
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 8:38 AM Florent Revest wrote:
> > > +static int check_bpf_snprintf_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
> > > +
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 3:58 AM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>
> Andrii Nakryiko writes:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 3:06 AM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Andrii Nakryiko writes:
> >>
> >> > On S
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 2:21 AM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 1:21 AM Andrii Nakryiko
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 8:38 AM Florent Revest wrote:
> > >
> > > This exercises most of the format specifiers.
> > >
1 - 100 of 577 matches
Mail list logo
