linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv10 2.6.35-rc6-tip 9/14] trace: uprobes 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]

Message-ID: <4C568FF7.9070300@hitachi.com>
Date:	Mon, 02 Aug 2010 18:29:27 +0900
From:	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Mark Wielaard <mjw@...hat.com>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Naren A Devaiah <naren.devaiah@...ibm.com>,
	Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>,
	Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	2nddept-manager@....hitachi.co.jp,
	SystemTAP <systemtap@...rces.redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv10 2.6.35-rc6-tip 9/14]  trace: uprobes trace_event interface

Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 02, 2010 at 09:56:37AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>>> Hmm, I disagree with it, because both Kprobes and Uprobes provides
>>>> APIs for modules too.
>>> I'm not sure there is a point in maintaining a leightweight version for out 
>>> of tree code. These modules could just select kprobes/uprobes events as 
>>> well.
>>>
>>> As you prefer, that was just a suggestion to make it more simple.
>> The upstream policy always was that out of tree code does not exist as far as 
>> the kernel is concerned. So it is wrong to make the kernel crappier while 
>> helping out of tree code.
> 
> Indeed.  In addition to that the current version of uprobes does not
> actually have any exported symbols.

Ah, indeed. :-(

And then, it conflicts with the description about uprobes in
Documentation/uprobes.txt:

> +Uprobes-based instrumentation can be packaged as a kernel
> +module.  In the simplest case, the module's init function installs
> +("registers") one or more probes, and the exit function unregisters
> +them.

So, that could be a bug.

Anyway, at least kprobes has some sample modules under samples/kprobes/.
Aren't they in-tree consumers of kprobes?

Thank you,

-- 
Masami HIRAMATSU
2nd Research Dept.
Hitachi, Ltd., Systems Development Laboratory
E-mail: masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com
--
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/