linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] sched/debug: Add new tracepoint to track cpu

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 Sep 2020 12:02:24 +0100
From:   Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@....com>
To:     Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>
Cc:     Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        vincent.donnefort@....com, mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org,
        vincent.guittot@...aro.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        valentin.schneider@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched/debug: Add new tracepoint to track cpu_capacity

On 09/02/20 09:54, Phil Auld wrote:
> > 
> > I think this decoupling is not necessary. The natural place for those
> > scheduler trace_event based on trace_points extension files is
> > kernel/sched/ and here the internal sched.h can just be included.
> > 
> > If someone really wants to build this as an out-of-tree module there is
> > an easy way to make kernel/sched/sched.h visible.
> >
> 
> It's not so much that we really _want_ to do this in an external module.
> But we aren't adding more trace events and my (limited) knowledge of
> BPF let me to the conclusion that its raw tracepoint functionality
> requires full events.  I didn't see any other way to do it.

I did have a patch that allowed that. It might be worth trying to upstream it.
It just required a new macro which could be problematic.

https://github.com/qais-yousef/linux/commit/fb9fea29edb8af327e6b2bf3bc41469a8e66df8b

With the above I could attach using bpf::RAW_TRACEPOINT mechanism.

Cheers

--
Qais Yousef