linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] convert ftrace syscall tracer to TRACE

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:	Sat, 9 May 2009 15:33:06 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc:	Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>, Tom Zanussi <tzanussi@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, laijs@...fujitsu.com,
	rostedt@...dmis.org, peterz@...radead.org,
	mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca, jiayingz@...gle.com,
	mbligh@...gle.com, roland@...hat.com, fche@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] convert ftrace syscall tracer to TRACE_EVENT()


* Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com> wrote:

> > Secondly, we should reuse the information we get in 
> > SYSCALL_DEFINE, to construct the TRACE_EVENT tracepoints 
> > directly - without having to list all syscalls again in a 
> > separate file.
> 
> Indeed, that's not trivial though, but feasible. I'm not sure we 
> can reuse the TRACE_EVENT macro directly inside SYSCALL_DEFINE. 
> The resulting macro tempest effect that would occur confuses me 
> and I have troubles to imagine the result.

Lets take an example. This syscall:

SYSCALL_DEFINE3(sched_setscheduler, pid_t, pid, int, policy,
                struct sched_param __user *, param)

Is equivalent to:

SYSCALL_DEFINE3(name, t1, v1, t2, v2, t3, v3)

('t' for type, 'v' for variable/value).

This would transform into the following TRACE_EVENT() construct:

TRACE_EVENT_SYSCALL2():

TRACE_EVENT(sys_##name,
	TP_PROTO(t1 v1, t2 v2),
	TP_ARGS(v1, v2),
	TP_STRUCT__entry(
		__field(t1, v1)
		__field(t2, v2)
	),
	TP_fast_assign(
		__entry->v1 = v1;
		__entry->v2 = v2;
	),
	TP_printk("%016Lx %016Lx", (u64)__entry->v1, (u64)__entry->v2)
);

We need TRACE_EVENT_SYSCALL[123456] definitions, and that's it.

The only place where we lose type information is the printk format - 
but that's not a big issue, as i'd expect the event record to be the 
main user of this.

[ In addition to this, we could extend DEFINE_SYSCALL[1..6] with a 
  (optional) format string definition field, and fill that in for 
  anything that matters. ]

Note, this assumes that all syscall types can be described via 
__field() - i think that's correct. (we dont want to deref strings 
as they are untrusted, and there are no arrays in syscall 
parameters)

Can you see any complication?

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/