linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH tracing/kprobes 4/7] tracing/kprobes: Add event profiling support

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]

Message-ID: <20090914185540.GD6045@nowhere>
Date:	Mon, 14 Sep 2009 20:55:41 +0200
From:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To:	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com>
Cc:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	systemtap <systemtap@...rces.redhat.com>,
	DLE <dle-develop@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ibm.com>,
	Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>,
	"K.Prasad" <prasad@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
	Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Tom Zanussi <tzanussi@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH tracing/kprobes 4/7] tracing/kprobes: Add event
	profiling support

On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 12:54:24PM -0400, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>>> I'd like to have a dispatcher function and flags internally :)
>>
>>
>> You mean kprobes that could support multiple probes?
>> That would be a nice solution IMHO...
>
> Yeah, actually kprobes could support multiple probes on the
> same point. But kprobe structure has many extensions which
> kprobe-tracer doesn't need, e.g. post_handler/break_handler,
> opcode, arch sprcific instructions.
> Kretprobe consumes more memories for storing return points :(.
>
> Thus, if we know there are two functions to be called on the
> same probe point, I think it is better to have a dispatcher.
> (Especially, in this case, we can call fixed functions, so
> it's easier way.)
>


Yeah, you could union the post_handler with profile_handler
or something like that.

It depends if kprobes may need one day to support an undeterminate
number of probes.

Also, is the post_handler called at the same location than the normal
probe?
And is a post handler called even if there is no normal handler?


There might be some of such factors that would force you to handle a
lot of corner cases, things that you wouldn't need to worry about
if you just had to maintain a simple rcu list of probes to call.

--
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/