linux-kernel - RE: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] ftrace: Use -mfentry when supported (this is for x86

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:	Fri, 18 Feb 2011 15:10:18 -0500
From:	Dominique Toupin <dominique.toupin@...csson.com>
To:	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
CC:	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	"2nddept-manager@....hitachi.co.jp" 
	<2nddept-manager@....hitachi.co.jp>
Subject: RE: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] ftrace: Use -mfentry when supported (this is
	for x86_64 right now)


My understanding is stop_machine will stop all processors for many ms.
Even if most of our systems are not hard real-time they are soft real-time and stopping all cores for a few ms is not allowed.
We can stop a few threads while we are jump patching but all processors is too much for us.

I can send other real use cases if you are interested.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mathieu Desnoyers [mailto:mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com] 
> Sent: 18-Feb-11 10:20
> To: Steven Rostedt; Dominique Toupin
> Cc: Masami Hiramatsu; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; Ingo 
> Molnar; Andrew Morton; Thomas Gleixner; Frederic Weisbecker; 
> H. Peter Anvin; Andi Kleen; 2nddept-manager@....hitachi.co.jp
> Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] ftrace: Use -mfentry when 
> supported (this is for x86_64 right now)
> 
> [Adding Dominique Toupin, from Ericsson, to CC list]
> 
> * Steven Rostedt (rostedt@...dmis.org) wrote:
> > On Fri, 2011-02-18 at 20:45 +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > > (2011/02/18 5:11), Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 2011-02-18 at 01:07 +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > > > 
> > > >> I just thought that frequent stop-machine is not so 
> good from the 
> > > >> user's POV. I agree that disabled probe ignoring the 
> call is enough.
> > > >> Maybe, it could be done with the similar mechanism of 
> jump optimization.
> > > > 
> > > > I thought jump optimization still calls stop_machine too?
> > > 
> > > Yes, but now it does batch optimization.
> > > Even if hundreds kprobes are registered separately, jump 
> > > optimization has been done in background with a 
> stop_machine per every 256 probes.
> > > (Until optimizing, kprobes can use breakpoints instead)
> > 
> > But a single optimized kprobe still must use stopmachine.
> > 
> > But it is true that the function tracer does it as one big 
> shot. That 
> > is, it will do all functions in a single stop machine that 
> needs to be 
> > changed. It too is batched, but there is not a limit to that batch.
> > 
> > I would be interested in hearing from users and real use cases that 
> > someone would like to trace functions but stopmachine is 
> too big of a 
> > hammer.
> 
> Hi Steven,
> 
> Telecom end users are one of such cases where the latency 
> induced by stop machine while the system is running is a 
> problem. Dominique Toupin could certainly tell us more about 
> Ericsson's use-cases.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Mathieu
> 
> --
> 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/