linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v11 2/5] ring-buffer: Introducing ring-buffer mapping functions

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]

Message-ID: <c3dba53f-66de-43f5-9b82-38aa807da67a@efficios.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2024 11:34:58 -0500
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
To: Vincent Donnefort <vdonnefort@...gle.com>, rostedt@...dmis.org,
 mhiramat@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 2/5] ring-buffer: Introducing ring-buffer mapping
 functions

On 2024-01-11 11:17, Vincent Donnefort wrote:
> In preparation for allowing the user-space to map a ring-buffer, add
> a set of mapping functions:
> 
>    ring_buffer_{map,unmap}()
>    ring_buffer_map_fault()
> 
> And controls on the ring-buffer:
> 
>    ring_buffer_map_get_reader()  /* swap reader and head */
> 
> Mapping the ring-buffer also involves:
> 
>    A unique ID for each subbuf of the ring-buffer, currently they are
>    only identified through their in-kernel VA.
> 
>    A meta-page, where are stored ring-buffer statistics and a
>    description for the current reader
> 

Hi Vincent,

The LTTng kernel tracer has supported mmap'd buffers for nearly 15 years [1],
and has a lot of similarities with this patch series.

LTTng has the notion of "subbuffer id" to allow atomically exchanging a
"reader" extra subbuffer with the subbuffer to be read. It implements
"get subbuffer" / "put subbuffer" ioctls to allow the consumer (reader)
to move the currently read subbuffer position. [2]

It would not hurt to compare your approach to LTTng and highlight
similarities/differences, and the rationale for the differences.

Especially when it comes to designing kernel ABIs, it's good to make sure
that all bases are covered, because those choices will have lasting impacts.

Thanks,

Mathieu

[1] https://git.lttng.org/?p=lttng-modules.git;a=blob;f=src/lib/ringbuffer/ring_buffer_mmap.c
[2] https://git.lttng.org/?p=lttng-modules.git;a=blob;f=src/lib/ringbuffer/ring_buffer_vfs.c

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
https://www.efficios.com