[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51D56E74.3090404@hitachi.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2013 21:45:40 +0900
From: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
"zhangwei(Jovi)" <jovi.zhangwei@...wei.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/4] tracing/kprobes: Fail to unregister if probe
event files are open
(2013/07/04 12:33), Steven Rostedt wrote:
> diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c
> index 7ed6976..ffcaf42 100644
> --- a/kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c
> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c
> @@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ static __kprobes bool trace_probe_is_on_module(struct trace_probe *tp)
> }
>
> static int register_probe_event(struct trace_probe *tp);
> -static void unregister_probe_event(struct trace_probe *tp);
> +static int unregister_probe_event(struct trace_probe *tp);
>
> static DEFINE_MUTEX(probe_lock);
> static LIST_HEAD(probe_list);
> @@ -340,9 +340,12 @@ static int unregister_trace_probe(struct trace_probe *tp)
> if (trace_probe_is_enabled(tp))
> return -EBUSY;
>
> + /* Will fail if probe is being used by ftrace or perf */
> + if (unregister_probe_event(tp))
> + return -EBUSY;
> +
> __unregister_trace_probe(tp);
> list_del(&tp->list);
> - unregister_probe_event(tp);
>
> return 0;
> }
This may cause an unexpected access violation at kprobe handler because
unregister_probe_event frees event_call/event_files and it will be
accessed until kprobe is *completely* disabled.
Actually disable_kprobe() doesn't ensure to finish the current running
kprobe handlers. Thus, even if trace_probe_is_enabled() returns false,
we must do synchronize_sched() for waiting, before unregister_probe_event().
OTOH, unregister_kprobe() waits for that. That's why I do
__unregister_trace_probe(tp) first here.
I think there are 2 solutions, one is adding a wait after disable_k*probe
at disable_trace_probe(), another is adding a wait before unregister_probe_event()
at unregister_trace_probe().
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