[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090826164624.GA21456@Krystal>
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 12:46:25 -0400
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing/profile: Fix profile_disable vs module_unload
* Steven Rostedt (rostedt@...dmis.org) wrote:
>
> On Wed, 26 Aug 2009, Li Zefan wrote:
>
> > Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2009-08-26 at 08:46 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > >
> > >> Aahh, I see the bug, its only ftrace that knows about the module, not
> > >> tracepoints themselves, _that_ needs fixing.
> > >
> > > You could possibly do something like:
> > >
> > > struct module *tp_mod = __module_address(&some_tp_symbol);
> > > struct module *cb_mod = __module_text_address(func);
> > >
> > > if (tp_mod && tp_mod != cb_mod) {
> > > ret = try_get_module(tp_mod);
> > > if (ret)
> > > goto fail;
> > > }
> > >
> > > in register_trace_##name() or thereabout.
> > >
> >
> > Actually I tried it, but it didn't work. As I said, You can't find
> > any tp symbol when registering tp callback. The same example again:
> >
> > In module bar, we have register_trace_foo()
> > In module foo, we have DEFINE_TRACE(foo) and trace_foo().
> >
> > bar doesn't know any symbol of foo, so it can't bump foo's refcnt,
> >
> > *Note: you can load module bar without loading module foo*
>
> WTF!!!!
>
> We can register a trace point that is defined in another module without
> having that module?? How is that possible? That looks totally busted, and
> that is not a case that I think we need to worry about, except to prevent
> it from ever happening.
>
Registering tracepoints even when no tracepoint definition is currently
visible is the intended allowed behavior. Let's say we need to trace
something happening in module init: if we disallow registering the tp
callback before the module is initialized, we run in a chicken and egg
problem.
So I am trying to figure out the problem source there. Is it that
modules containing the tp callbacks need to know if those are actually
connected to an instrumented module ? Or is it that the instrumented
module needs to know if a probe module is connected to is ? Or is it the
teardown of the probe module ? No refcount is needed there, because we
surround the probe call by preempt disable/enable, and we use
synchronize_sched() before removing the module which contains probe
callbacks.
Mathieu-trying-to-figure-out-what-this-whole-thread-is-about :)
> As for ref counts, would something like this work?
>
> (untested)
>
> -- Steve
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/tracepoint.h b/include/linux/tracepoint.h
> index 0341f2e..055275b 100644
> --- a/include/linux/tracepoint.h
> +++ b/include/linux/tracepoint.h
> @@ -109,8 +109,9 @@ struct tracepoint {
> #define EXPORT_TRACEPOINT_SYMBOL(name) \
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(__tracepoint_##name)
>
> -extern void tracepoint_update_probe_range(struct tracepoint *begin,
> - struct tracepoint *end);
> +extern void tracepoint_update_probe_range(struct module *,
> + struct tracepoint *begin,
> + struct tracepoint *end);
>
> #else /* !CONFIG_TRACEPOINTS */
> #define DECLARE_TRACE_WITH_CALLBACK(name, proto, args, reg, unreg) \
> diff --git a/kernel/module.c b/kernel/module.c
> index b182143..a8e69fa 100644
> --- a/kernel/module.c
> +++ b/kernel/module.c
> @@ -2974,7 +2974,7 @@ void module_update_tracepoints(void)
> mutex_lock(&module_mutex);
> list_for_each_entry(mod, &modules, list)
> if (!mod->taints)
> - tracepoint_update_probe_range(mod->tracepoints,
> + tracepoint_update_probe_range(mod, mod->tracepoints,
> mod->tracepoints + mod->num_tracepoints);
> mutex_unlock(&module_mutex);
> }
> diff --git a/kernel/tracepoint.c b/kernel/tracepoint.c
> index 06f165a..b150255 100644
> --- a/kernel/tracepoint.c
> +++ b/kernel/tracepoint.c
> @@ -274,7 +274,8 @@ static void disable_tracepoint(struct tracepoint *elem)
> * Updates the probe callback corresponding to a range of tracepoints.
> */
> void
> -tracepoint_update_probe_range(struct tracepoint *begin, struct tracepoint *end)
> +tracepoint_update_probe_range(struct module *mod,
> + struct tracepoint *begin, struct tracepoint *end)
> {
> struct tracepoint *iter;
> struct tracepoint_entry *mark_entry;
> @@ -286,9 +287,15 @@ tracepoint_update_probe_range(struct tracepoint *begin, struct tracepoint *end)
> for (iter = begin; iter < end; iter++) {
> mark_entry = get_tracepoint(iter->name);
> if (mark_entry) {
> + if (mod) {
> + if (!try_module_get(mod))
> + continue;
> + }
> set_tracepoint(&mark_entry, iter,
> !!mark_entry->refcount);
> } else {
> + if (mod)
> + module_put(mod);
> disable_tracepoint(iter);
> }
> }
> @@ -301,7 +308,7 @@ tracepoint_update_probe_range(struct tracepoint *begin, struct tracepoint *end)
> static void tracepoint_update_probes(void)
> {
> /* Core kernel tracepoints */
> - tracepoint_update_probe_range(__start___tracepoints,
> + tracepoint_update_probe_range(NULL, __start___tracepoints,
> __stop___tracepoints);
> /* tracepoints in modules. */
> module_update_tracepoints();
> @@ -556,7 +563,7 @@ int tracepoint_module_notify(struct notifier_block *self,
> switch (val) {
> case MODULE_STATE_COMING:
> case MODULE_STATE_GOING:
> - tracepoint_update_probe_range(mod->tracepoints,
> + tracepoint_update_probe_range(mod, mod->tracepoints,
> mod->tracepoints + mod->num_tracepoints);
> break;
> }
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists