[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20180809041856.1547-6-ravi.bangoria@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2018 09:48:55 +0530
From: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@...ux.ibm.com>
To: srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, oleg@...hat.com, rostedt@...dmis.org,
mhiramat@...nel.org, liu.song.a23@...il.com
Cc: peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com, acme@...nel.org,
alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, jolsa@...hat.com,
namhyung@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
ananth@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, alexis.berlemont@...il.com,
naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mips@...ux-mips.org,
linux@...linux.org.uk, ralf@...ux-mips.org, paul.burton@...s.com,
Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH v8 5/6] trace_uprobe/sdt: Prevent multiple reference counter for same uprobe
We assume to have only one reference counter for one uprobe.
Don't allow user to add multiple trace_uprobe entries having
same inode+offset but different reference counter.
Ex,
# echo "p:sdt_tick/loop2 /home/ravi/tick:0x6e4(0x10036)" > uprobe_events
# echo "p:sdt_tick/loop2_1 /home/ravi/tick:0x6e4(0xfffff)" >> uprobe_events
bash: echo: write error: Invalid argument
# dmesg
trace_kprobe: Reference counter offset mismatch.
There is one exception though:
When user is trying to replace the old entry with the new
one, we allow this if the new entry does not conflict with
any other existing entries.
Signed-off-by: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@...ux.ibm.com>
---
kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
index bf2be098eb08..be64d943d7ea 100644
--- a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
@@ -324,6 +324,35 @@ static int unregister_trace_uprobe(struct trace_uprobe *tu)
return 0;
}
+/*
+ * Uprobe with multiple reference counter is not allowed. i.e.
+ * If inode and offset matches, reference counter offset *must*
+ * match as well. Though, there is one exception: If user is
+ * replacing old trace_uprobe with new one(same group/event),
+ * then we allow same uprobe with new reference counter as far
+ * as the new one does not conflict with any other existing
+ * ones.
+ */
+static struct trace_uprobe *find_old_trace_uprobe(struct trace_uprobe *new)
+{
+ struct trace_uprobe *tmp, *old = NULL;
+ struct inode *new_inode = d_real_inode(new->path.dentry);
+
+ old = find_probe_event(trace_event_name(&new->tp.call),
+ new->tp.call.class->system);
+
+ list_for_each_entry(tmp, &uprobe_list, list) {
+ if ((old ? old != tmp : true) &&
+ new_inode == d_real_inode(tmp->path.dentry) &&
+ new->offset == tmp->offset &&
+ new->ref_ctr_offset != tmp->ref_ctr_offset) {
+ pr_warn("Reference counter offset mismatch.");
+ return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
+ }
+ }
+ return old;
+}
+
/* Register a trace_uprobe and probe_event */
static int register_trace_uprobe(struct trace_uprobe *tu)
{
@@ -333,8 +362,12 @@ static int register_trace_uprobe(struct trace_uprobe *tu)
mutex_lock(&uprobe_lock);
/* register as an event */
- old_tu = find_probe_event(trace_event_name(&tu->tp.call),
- tu->tp.call.class->system);
+ old_tu = find_old_trace_uprobe(tu);
+ if (IS_ERR(old_tu)) {
+ ret = PTR_ERR(old_tu);
+ goto end;
+ }
+
if (old_tu) {
/* delete old event */
ret = unregister_trace_uprobe(old_tu);
--
2.14.4
Powered by blists - more mailing lists