[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1435719455-91155-2-git-send-email-hekuang@huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2015 02:57:31 +0000
From: He Kuang <hekuang@...wei.com>
To: <ast@...mgrid.com>, <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
<masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>, <mingo@...hat.com>,
<acme@...hat.com>, <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, <jolsa@...nel.org>,
<namhyung@...nel.org>
CC: <wangnan0@...wei.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: [RFC PATCH 1/5] bpf: Put perf_events check ahead of bpf prog
When we add a kprobe point and record events by perf, the execution path
of all threads on each cpu will enter this point, but perf may only
record events on a particular thread or cpu at this kprobe point, a
check on call->perf_events list filters out the threads which perf is
not recording.
Currently, bpf_prog will be entered at the beginning of
kprobe_perf_func() before the above check, which makes bpf_prog be
executed in every threads including determined not to be recorded
threads. A simple test can demonstrate this:
'bpf_prog_on_write.o' contains a bpf prog which outputs to trace buffer
when it is entered. Run a background thread 'another-dd' and 'dd'
simultaneously, but only record 'dd' thread by perf. The result shows
all threads trigger bpf_prog.
$ another-dd if=/dev/zero of=test1 bs=4k count=1000000
$ perf record -v --event bpf_prog_on_write.o -- dd if=/dev/zero of=test2 bs=4k count=3
$ cat /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/trace
another-dd-1007 [000] d... 120.225835: : generic_perform_write: tgid=1007, pid=1007
another-dd-1007 [000] d... 120.227123: : generic_perform_write: tgid=1007, pid=1007
[repeat many times...]
another-dd-1007 [000] d... 120.412395: : generic_perform_write: tgid=1007, pid=1007
another-dd-1007 [000] d... 120.412524: : generic_perform_write: tgid=1007, pid=1007
dd-1009 [000] d... 120.413080: : generic_perform_write: tgid=1009, pid=1009
dd-1009 [000] d... 120.414846: : generic_perform_write: tgid=1009, pid=1009
dd-1009 [000] d... 120.415013: : generic_perform_write: tgid=1009, pid=1009
another-dd-1007 [000] d... 120.416128: : generic_perform_write: tgid=1007, pid=1007
another-dd-1007 [000] d... 120.416295: : generic_perform_write: tgid=1007, pid=1007
This patch moves the check on perf_events list ahead and skip running
bpf_prog on threads perf not care.
After this patch:
$ another-dd if=/dev/zero of=test1 bs=4k count=1000000
$ perf record -v --event bpf_prog_on_write.o -- dd if=/dev/zero of=test2 bs=4k count=3
$ cat /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/trace
dd-994 [000] d... 46.386754: : generic_perform_write: tgid=994, pid=994
dd-994 [000] d... 46.389167: : generic_perform_write: tgid=994, pid=994
dd-994 [000] d... 46.389551: : generic_perform_write: tgid=994, pid=994
Signed-off-by: He Kuang <hekuang@...wei.com>
Acked-by: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
---
kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c | 12 ++++++------
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c
index d0ce590..5600df8 100644
--- a/kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c
@@ -1141,13 +1141,13 @@ kprobe_perf_func(struct trace_kprobe *tk, struct pt_regs *regs)
int size, __size, dsize;
int rctx;
- if (prog && !trace_call_bpf(prog, regs))
- return;
-
head = this_cpu_ptr(call->perf_events);
if (hlist_empty(head))
return;
+ if (prog && !trace_call_bpf(prog, regs))
+ return;
+
dsize = __get_data_size(&tk->tp, regs);
__size = sizeof(*entry) + tk->tp.size + dsize;
size = ALIGN(__size + sizeof(u32), sizeof(u64));
@@ -1176,13 +1176,13 @@ kretprobe_perf_func(struct trace_kprobe *tk, struct kretprobe_instance *ri,
int size, __size, dsize;
int rctx;
- if (prog && !trace_call_bpf(prog, regs))
- return;
-
head = this_cpu_ptr(call->perf_events);
if (hlist_empty(head))
return;
+ if (prog && !trace_call_bpf(prog, regs))
+ return;
+
dsize = __get_data_size(&tk->tp, regs);
__size = sizeof(*entry) + tk->tp.size + dsize;
size = ALIGN(__size + sizeof(u32), sizeof(u64));
--
1.8.5.2
--
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