linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] ftrace: Add dynamically allocated trampolines

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:	Mon, 7 Jul 2014 15:58:28 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
	Seth Jennings <sjenning@...hat.com>,
	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] ftrace: Add dynamically allocated trampolines

On Thu, 3 Jul 2014, Steven Rostedt wrote:

> [ NOT READY FOR INCLUSION! ]
> 
> Note, this is based off of my remove ftrace_start/stop() patch set.
> 
> I've been wanting to do this for years, and just never gotten around to it.
> But with all this talk of kpatch and kgraft live kernel patching using
> the ftrace infrastructure, it seems like a good time to do it.
> 
> The way the function callback mechanism works in ftrace is that if there's
> only one function callback registered, it will set the mcount/fentry
> trampoline to call that function directly. But as soon as you register
> another callback, the mcount trampoline calls a loop function that iterates
> over all the registered callbacks (ftrace_ops) checking their hash tables
> to see if the called function matches the ops before calling its callback.
> This happens even if the two registered functions are not even tracing
> the same function!
> 
> This really sucks if you are tracing all functions, and then add a kprobe
> or perf event that traces a single function. That will cause all the
> other functions being traced to perform the loop test.
[ ... snip ... ]

For the record -- I just did a quick test, and kGraft works nicely on top 
of this patchset.

Will be looking into the patches more closely later this week.

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
--
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/