linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] uprobes: pre-filtering

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, 25 Jan 2013 20:34:07 +0100
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:	Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Anton Arapov <anton@...hat.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Josh Stone <jistone@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Suzuki Poulose <suzuki@...ibm.com>,
	Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] uprobes: pre-filtering

On 01/25, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> > On 01/25, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >
> > > * Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > The other alternative is to extend the current abi and pass
> > > > the prefilter option. Should we extend the abi for userspace
> > > > tracing is obviously debatable.
> > >
> > > That's the obvious path to go - why add something to the kernel
> > > if user-space cannot make use of it?
> >
> > This is what I am going to (try to) do, but I am not sure if this makes
> > sense...
> >
> > For the start, can't we teach 'uprobe_events' file to accept, say,
> >
> > 	'p file:0x1234 pid=1 other-opts'
> >
> > for the start? This looks simple enough, and I after looked
> > into tools/perf it seems that perf can be changed too.
> >
> > What do you think?
>
> Sounds sensible and functional to me.

Great, thanks.

> > Then we can extend 'pid=' option to accept the list of pids,
> > perhaps.
> >
> > In the long term we probably need uprobes/pid_filter or
> > something like this, it should allow to add/del pid
> > dynamically. I really do not know.
>
> For now removing+adding a new one should be enough to 'change' a
> uprobe, right?

Yes, yes. I meant that obviously we can do more/better to filter-out
the tasks we do not want to probe. But this need more changes, and more
importantly this needs more discussion about API/ABI/etc.

Thanks.

Oleg.

--
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/