[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2013 15:44:10 +0900
From: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
To: oskar.andero@...ymobile.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
anil.s.keshavamurthy@...el.com, ananth@...ibm.com,
radovan.lekanovic@...ymobile.com, bjorn.davidsson@...ymobile.com,
Toby Collett <toby.collett@...ymobile.com>,
"yrl.pp-manager.tt@...achi.com" <yrl.pp-manager.tt@...achi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] kprobes: delay blacklist symbol lookup until we actually
need it
(2013/04/03 17:28), oskar.andero@...ymobile.com wrote:
>
> +/* it can take some time ( > 100ms ) to initialise the
> + * blacklist so we delay this until we actually need it
> + */
> +static void init_kprobe_blacklist(void)
> +{
> + int i;
> + unsigned long offset = 0, size = 0;
> + char *modname, namebuf[128];
> + const char *symbol_name;
> + void *addr;
> + struct kprobe_blackpoint *kb;
> +
> + /*
> + * Lookup and populate the kprobe_blacklist.
> + *
> + * Unlike the kretprobe blacklist, we'll need to determine
> + * the range of addresses that belong to the said functions,
> + * since a kprobe need not necessarily be at the beginning
> + * of a function.
> + */
> + for (kb = kprobe_blacklist; kb->name != NULL; kb++) {
> + kprobe_lookup_name(kb->name, addr);
> + if (!addr)
> + continue;
> +
> + kb->start_addr = (unsigned long)addr;
> + symbol_name = kallsyms_lookup(kb->start_addr,
> + &size, &offset, &modname, namebuf);
> + if (!symbol_name)
> + kb->range = 0;
> + else
> + kb->range = size;
> + }
> +
> + if (kretprobe_blacklist_size) {
> + /* lookup the function address from its name */
> + for (i = 0; kretprobe_blacklist[i].name != NULL; i++) {
> + kprobe_lookup_name(kretprobe_blacklist[i].name,
> + kretprobe_blacklist[i].addr);
> + if (!kretprobe_blacklist[i].addr)
> + printk("kretprobe: lookup failed: %s\n",
> + kretprobe_blacklist[i].name);
> + }
> + }
> + kprobe_blacklist_initialized = 1;
> +}
> +
> #ifdef __ARCH_WANT_KPROBES_INSN_SLOT
> /*
> * kprobe->ainsn.insn points to the copy of the instruction to be
> @@ -1331,6 +1379,9 @@ static int __kprobes in_kprobes_functions(unsigned long addr)
> if (addr >= (unsigned long)__kprobes_text_start &&
> addr < (unsigned long)__kprobes_text_end)
> return -EINVAL;
> +
> + if (!kprobe_blacklist_initialized)
> + init_kprobe_blacklist();
> /*
> * If there exists a kprobe_blacklist, verify and
> * fail any probe registration in the prohibited area
> @@ -1816,6 +1867,8 @@ int __kprobes register_kretprobe(struct kretprobe *rp)
> void *addr;
>
> if (kretprobe_blacklist_size) {
> + if (!kprobe_blacklist_initialized)
> + init_kprobe_blacklist();
Joonsoo reminds me that these calling points are not protected by kprobe_mutex,
thus we have to do something for avoiding concurrent initialization.
Perhaps, the easiest way is to protect init_kprobe_blacklist() by kprobe_mutex
and check kprobe_blacklist_initialized again in the top of that.
Thank you,
--
Masami HIRAMATSU
IT Management Research Dept. Linux Technology Center
Hitachi, Ltd., Yokohama Research Laboratory
E-mail: masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.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