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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2010 12:47:40 -0400 From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com> To: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Mark Wielaard <mjw@...hat.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Naren A Devaiah <naren.devaiah@...ibm.com>, Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.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>, Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [PATCHv11 2.6.36-rc2-tip 5/15] 5: uprobes: Uprobes (un)registration and exception handling. * Srikar Dronamraju (srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com) wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 06, 2010 at 11:16:42PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote: [...] > > > > Which btw, brings up two more issues, one in uprobes and one in perf. > > For one even in userspace I think the dynamic probes will really just > > be the tip of the iceberg and we'll get more bang for the buck from > > static traces, which is something that's no supported in uprobes yet. > > As a start supporting the dtrace-style sdt.h header would be a great > > help, and then we can decide if we need somthing even better on top. > > Yes, Static tracing using dtrace style sdt.h is a cool thing to do. > Already SystemTap has this facility. However I think its probably > better done at perf user interface level. We currently have this feature in UST. We're adding "markers" into the applications, and a UST daemon talks with an in-process library helper thread to enable/disable markers and control tracing over unix sockets. We're currently in the process of moving from markers to the TRACE_EVENT()+tracepoints infrastructure. Thanks, Mathieu > > The way I look at it is perf probe decodes the static markers and asks > uprobes to place probepoints over there. > Do you see a different approach? If yes can you tell what you were > looking at? -- Mathieu Desnoyers Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists