[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131120125649.40ca99c3@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2013 12:56:49 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
Sandeepa Prabhu <sandeepa.prabhu@...aro.org>, x86@...nel.org,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
systemtap@...rceware.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip v3 00/23] kprobes: introduce NOKPROBE_SYMBOL() and
general cleaning of kprobe blacklist
On Wed, 20 Nov 2013 12:36:00 -0500
"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com> wrote:
> Hi -
>
> > > Does this new blacklist cover enough that the kernel now survives a
> > > broadly wildcarded perf-probe, e.g. over e.g. all of its kallsyms?
> >
> > That's generally the purpose of the annotations - if it doesn't then
> > that's a bug.
>
> AFAIK, no kernel since kprobes was introduced has ever stood up to
> that test. perf probe lacks the wildcarding powers of systemtap, so
> one needs to resort to something like:
>
> # cat /proc/kallsyms | grep ' [tT] ' | while read addr type symbol; do
> perf probe $symbol
> done
I'm curious to why one would do that. IIUC, perf now has function
tracing support.
-- Steve
>
> then wait for a few hours for that to finish. Then, or while the loop
> is still running, run
>
> # perf record -e 'probe:*' -aR sleep 1
>
> to take a kernel down.
>
>
> - FChE
--
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