[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131115122833.GE10456@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 13:28:33 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: perf/tracepoint: another fuzzer generated lockup
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 10:16:18AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> Kprobes itself can detect nested call by using per-cpu current-running
> kprobe pointer. And if it is nested, it just skips calling handlers.
> Anyway, I don't recommend to probe inside the handlers, but yes,
> you can trace perf-handler by ftrace B). I actually traced a kprobe-bug
> by kprobe-tracer last night, that was amazing :)
Ah, ok, so that would avoid the worst problems. Good. Should we still
mark the entire perf swevent path as __kprobes just to be sure?
--
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