Re: [RFC PATCH -tip 0/9] kprobes: Cleanup jprobe implementation
On Sat, 10 Mar 2018 09:24:44 +0100 Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > Since we decided to remove jprobe from kernel last year, > > its APIs are disabled and we worked on moving in-kernel > > jprobe users to kprobes or trace-events. And now no jprobe > > users are here anymore. > > > > I think it is good time to get rid of jprobe implementation > > from the kernel. However, I need other arch developers help > > to complete it, since jprobe is implemented multi arch wide. > > I can remove those code, but can not test all of those. > > > > Here is the series of patches to show how to do that. > > I tried to remove it from x86 tree. Basically we need to > > do 3 things; > > > > - Remove jprobe functions (register/unregister, > >setjump/longjump) from generic/arch-dependent code. > >[1/9][2/9][3/9] > > - Remove break_handler related code. > >[4/9][5/9][6/9] > > - Do not disable preemption on exception handler > >[7/9][8/9][9/9] > > > > The [3/9] and [6/9] are destractive changes except for x86 > > (means causes build errors) since those arch still have some > > references of those functions. So we need to write patches > > similar to [2/9] and [5/9] for each arch before applying those. > > In this series I sorted it as this order just for review, > > [3/9] and [6/9] should be applied after all archs have > > been fixed. > > > > Also, [7/9] is a kind of destractive, which changes required > > behavior for the pre_handlers which changes regs->ip. > > So we also need a patch similar to [7/9] for each arch too. > > Fortunately, current in-tree such user is very limited, both > > works only on x86. So it is not hurry, but we need to change > > arch dependent code. > > > > Thank you, > > > > --- > > > > Masami Hiramatsu (9): > > kprobes: Remove jprobe API implementation > > x86: kprobes: Remove jprobe implementation > > kprobes: Remove jprobe data structure and interfaces > > kprobes: Ignore break_handler > > x86: kprobes: Ignore break_handler > > kprobes: Remove break_handler from struct kprobe > > x86: kprobes: Do not disable preempt on int3 path > > error-injection: Fix to not enabling preemption in pre_handler > > tracing: kprobes: Fix to not enabling preemption > > > > > > Documentation/kprobes.txt| 13 ++-- > > arch/x86/include/asm/kprobes.h |3 - > > arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/common.h | 10 --- > > arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/core.c | 114 > > ++ > > arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/ftrace.c | 21 +-- > > arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/opt.c|1 > > include/linux/kprobes.h | 54 -- > > kernel/fail_function.c |1 > > kernel/kprobes.c | 115 > > ++ > > kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c |3 - > > 10 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 315 deletions(-) > > Nice work, and I love the diffstat, but please do a series that works (builds > and > boots and has working kprobes) at every interim step. Thank you! Yes, I'm thinking just keep header files no change (no removing API and structure) until all archs apply C file changes in next version, so that we can avoid any build error/test error. Thanks, > > Thanks, > > Ingo -- Masami Hiramatsu
Re: [RFC PATCH -tip 0/9] kprobes: Cleanup jprobe implementation
On Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:54:02 -0500 Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Fri, 9 Mar 2018 21:35:17 +0900 > Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > Since we decided to remove jprobe from kernel last year, > > its APIs are disabled and we worked on moving in-kernel > > jprobe users to kprobes or trace-events. And now no jprobe > > users are here anymore. > > > > I think it is good time to get rid of jprobe implementation > > from the kernel. However, I need other arch developers help > > to complete it, since jprobe is implemented multi arch wide. > > I can remove those code, but can not test all of those. > > > > Here is the series of patches to show how to do that. > > I tried to remove it from x86 tree. Basically we need to > > do 3 things; > > > > - Remove jprobe functions (register/unregister, > >setjump/longjump) from generic/arch-dependent code. > >[1/9][2/9][3/9] > > - Remove break_handler related code. > >[4/9][5/9][6/9] > > - Do not disable preemption on exception handler > >[7/9][8/9][9/9] > > > > The [3/9] and [6/9] are destractive changes except for x86 > > (means causes build errors) since those arch still have some > > references of those functions. So we need to write patches > > similar to [2/9] and [5/9] for each arch before applying those. > > In this series I sorted it as this order just for review, > > [3/9] and [6/9] should be applied after all archs have > > been fixed. > > > > Also, [7/9] is a kind of destractive, which changes required > > behavior for the pre_handlers which changes regs->ip. > > So we also need a patch similar to [7/9] for each arch too. > > Fortunately, current in-tree such user is very limited, both > > works only on x86. So it is not hurry, but we need to change > > arch dependent code. > > > > Hi Masami, > > thanks for doing all this. I do want to review this and your other > patch set. Thanks! > I've just been traveling a lot. I came home from California > yesterday and will be leaving Sunday to Portland for ELC. Will you be > there? Oh, no, sorry I'll not be there. Anyway, I will wait for your review. :) > > -- Steve -- Masami Hiramatsu
Re: [RFC PATCH -tip 0/9] kprobes: Cleanup jprobe implementation
* Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > Hello, > > Since we decided to remove jprobe from kernel last year, > its APIs are disabled and we worked on moving in-kernel > jprobe users to kprobes or trace-events. And now no jprobe > users are here anymore. > > I think it is good time to get rid of jprobe implementation > from the kernel. However, I need other arch developers help > to complete it, since jprobe is implemented multi arch wide. > I can remove those code, but can not test all of those. > > Here is the series of patches to show how to do that. > I tried to remove it from x86 tree. Basically we need to > do 3 things; > > - Remove jprobe functions (register/unregister, >setjump/longjump) from generic/arch-dependent code. >[1/9][2/9][3/9] > - Remove break_handler related code. >[4/9][5/9][6/9] > - Do not disable preemption on exception handler >[7/9][8/9][9/9] > > The [3/9] and [6/9] are destractive changes except for x86 > (means causes build errors) since those arch still have some > references of those functions. So we need to write patches > similar to [2/9] and [5/9] for each arch before applying those. > In this series I sorted it as this order just for review, > [3/9] and [6/9] should be applied after all archs have > been fixed. > > Also, [7/9] is a kind of destractive, which changes required > behavior for the pre_handlers which changes regs->ip. > So we also need a patch similar to [7/9] for each arch too. > Fortunately, current in-tree such user is very limited, both > works only on x86. So it is not hurry, but we need to change > arch dependent code. > > Thank you, > > --- > > Masami Hiramatsu (9): > kprobes: Remove jprobe API implementation > x86: kprobes: Remove jprobe implementation > kprobes: Remove jprobe data structure and interfaces > kprobes: Ignore break_handler > x86: kprobes: Ignore break_handler > kprobes: Remove break_handler from struct kprobe > x86: kprobes: Do not disable preempt on int3 path > error-injection: Fix to not enabling preemption in pre_handler > tracing: kprobes: Fix to not enabling preemption > > > Documentation/kprobes.txt| 13 ++-- > arch/x86/include/asm/kprobes.h |3 - > arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/common.h | 10 --- > arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/core.c | 114 > ++ > arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/ftrace.c | 21 +-- > arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/opt.c|1 > include/linux/kprobes.h | 54 -- > kernel/fail_function.c |1 > kernel/kprobes.c | 115 > ++ > kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c |3 - > 10 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 315 deletions(-) Nice work, and I love the diffstat, but please do a series that works (builds and boots and has working kprobes) at every interim step. Thanks, Ingo
Re: [RFC PATCH -tip 0/9] kprobes: Cleanup jprobe implementation
On Fri, 9 Mar 2018 21:35:17 +0900 Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > Hello, > > Since we decided to remove jprobe from kernel last year, > its APIs are disabled and we worked on moving in-kernel > jprobe users to kprobes or trace-events. And now no jprobe > users are here anymore. > > I think it is good time to get rid of jprobe implementation > from the kernel. However, I need other arch developers help > to complete it, since jprobe is implemented multi arch wide. > I can remove those code, but can not test all of those. > > Here is the series of patches to show how to do that. > I tried to remove it from x86 tree. Basically we need to > do 3 things; > > - Remove jprobe functions (register/unregister, >setjump/longjump) from generic/arch-dependent code. >[1/9][2/9][3/9] > - Remove break_handler related code. >[4/9][5/9][6/9] > - Do not disable preemption on exception handler >[7/9][8/9][9/9] > > The [3/9] and [6/9] are destractive changes except for x86 > (means causes build errors) since those arch still have some > references of those functions. So we need to write patches > similar to [2/9] and [5/9] for each arch before applying those. > In this series I sorted it as this order just for review, > [3/9] and [6/9] should be applied after all archs have > been fixed. > > Also, [7/9] is a kind of destractive, which changes required > behavior for the pre_handlers which changes regs->ip. > So we also need a patch similar to [7/9] for each arch too. > Fortunately, current in-tree such user is very limited, both > works only on x86. So it is not hurry, but we need to change > arch dependent code. > Hi Masami, thanks for doing all this. I do want to review this and your other patch set. I've just been traveling a lot. I came home from California yesterday and will be leaving Sunday to Portland for ELC. Will you be there? -- Steve
