[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1308225141.13240.25.camel@twins>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 13:52:21 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Roland McGrath <roland@...k.frob.com>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3.0-rc2-tip 13/22] 13: uprobes: Handing int3 and
singlestep exception.
On Tue, 2011-06-07 at 18:30 +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> +void uprobe_notify_resume(struct pt_regs *regs)
> +{
> + struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> + struct uprobe_task *utask;
> + struct mm_struct *mm;
> + struct uprobe *u = NULL;
> + unsigned long probept;
> +
> + utask = current->utask;
> + mm = current->mm;
> + if (!utask || utask->state == UTASK_BP_HIT) {
> + probept = get_uprobe_bkpt_addr(regs);
> + down_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
> + vma = find_vma(mm, probept);
> + if (vma && valid_vma(vma))
> + u = find_uprobe(vma->vm_file->f_mapping->host,
> + probept - vma->vm_start +
> + (vma->vm_pgoff << PAGE_SHIFT));
> + up_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
> + if (!u)
> + goto cleanup_ret;
> + if (!utask) {
> + utask = add_utask();
> + if (!utask)
> + goto cleanup_ret;
So if we fail to allocate task state,..
> + }
> + /* TODO Start queueing signals. */
> + utask->active_uprobe = u;
> + handler_chain(u, regs);
> + utask->state = UTASK_SSTEP;
> + if (!pre_ssout(u, regs, probept))
> + user_enable_single_step(current);
> + else
> + goto cleanup_ret;
> + } else if (utask->state == UTASK_SSTEP) {
> + u = utask->active_uprobe;
> + if (sstep_complete(u, regs)) {
> + put_uprobe(u);
> + utask->active_uprobe = NULL;
> + utask->state = UTASK_RUNNING;
> + user_disable_single_step(current);
> + xol_free_insn_slot(current);
> +
> + /* TODO Stop queueing signals. */
> + }
> + }
> + return;
> +
> +cleanup_ret:
> + if (u) {
> + down_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
> + if (!set_orig_insn(current, u, probept, true))
we try to undo the probe? That doesn't make any sense. I thought you
meant to return to userspace, let it re-take the trap and try again
until you do manage to allocate the user resource.
This behaviour makes probes totally unreliable under memory pressure.
> + atomic_dec(&mm->uprobes_count);
> + up_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
> + put_uprobe(u);
> + } else {
> + /*TODO Return SIGTRAP signal */
> + }
> + if (utask) {
> + utask->active_uprobe = NULL;
> + utask->state = UTASK_RUNNING;
> + }
> + set_instruction_pointer(regs, probept);
> +}
Also, there's a scary amount of TODO in there...
--
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