linux-kernel - Re: systemtap broken by removal of register_timer

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <515C7720.2020503@redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 03 Apr 2013 11:38:24 -0700
From:	Josh Stone <jistone@...hat.com>
To:	"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>
CC:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	SystemTap <systemtap@...rceware.org>
Subject: Re: systemtap broken by removal of register_timer_hook

On 04/03/2013 07:44 AM, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> Hi -
> 
> On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 02:49:53PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 
>> Sounds good, would you like to propose a version? We are also
>> interested in a timer tick event tracepoint for dynticks debugging.
> 
> How about this?
> 
> Author: Frank Ch. Eigler <fche@...hat.com>
> Date:   Wed Apr 3 10:35:21 2013 -0400
> 
>     profiling: add profile_tick tracepoint
>     
>     Commit ba6fdda4 removed the timer_hook mechanism for modules to listen
>     to profiling timer ticks (without having to set up more complicated
>     perf mechanisms).  To reduce the impact on out-of-tree users, a
>     TRACE_EVENT-flavoured tracepoint is added in its place.  Tested with
>     perf and systemtap.

One nice benefit over register_timer_hook() is that a tracepoint allows
multiple consumers, like the old register_profile_notifier() did.

>     
>     Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
>     Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
>     Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
>     Signed-off-by: Frank Ch. Eigler <fche@...hat.com>
> 
> diff --git a/include/trace/events/profile.h b/include/trace/events/profile.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..b48b6fe
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/include/trace/events/profile.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
> +#undef TRACE_SYSTEM
> +#define TRACE_SYSTEM profile
> +
> +#if !defined(_TRACE_PROFILE_H) || defined(TRACE_HEADER_MULTI_READ)
> +#define _TRACE_PROFILE_H
> +
> +#include <linux/tracepoint.h>
> +
> +
> +struct pt_regs;
> +
> +/**
> + * profile_tick - called when the profiling timer ticks
> + * @regs:	pointer to struct pt_regs*
> + */
> +
> +TRACE_EVENT(profile_tick,
> +	TP_PROTO(int type, struct pt_regs *regs),
> +	TP_ARGS(type, regs),
> +	TP_STRUCT__entry(
> +		__field( int,			type	)
> +		__field( struct pt_regs*,	regs	)
> +	),
> +	TP_fast_assign(
> +		__entry->type	= type;
> +		__entry->regs	= regs;
> +	),
> +	TP_printk("type=%d regs=%p", __entry->type, __entry->regs)
> +);

I agree that full regs are good for the tracepoint in general, but I
doubt that this pointer is useful for the printk.  Maybe instead print
instruction_pointer(__entry->regs)?

> +
> +
> +#endif /*  _TRACE_PROFILE_H */
> +
> +/* This part must be outside protection */
> +#include <trace/define_trace.h>
> diff --git a/kernel/profile.c b/kernel/profile.c
> index dc3384e..d61f921 100644
> --- a/kernel/profile.c
> +++ b/kernel/profile.c
> @@ -29,6 +29,9 @@
>  #include <asm/irq_regs.h>
>  #include <asm/ptrace.h>
>  
> +#define CREATE_TRACE_POINTS
> +#include <trace/events/profile.h>
> +
>  struct profile_hit {
>  	u32 pc, hits;
>  };
> @@ -414,6 +417,8 @@ void profile_tick(int type)
>  {
>  	struct pt_regs *regs = get_irq_regs();
>  
> +	trace_profile_tick(type, regs);
> +
>  	if (!user_mode(regs) && prof_cpu_mask != NULL &&
>  	    cpumask_test_cpu(smp_processor_id(), prof_cpu_mask))
>  		profile_hit(type, (void *)profile_pc(regs));
> 

--
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/