linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv2 perf/core 13/22] selftests/bpf: Rename uprobe_syscall_executed prog to test_uretprobe

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: <aCbtu2LQxHo6pgVH@krava>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 09:48:11 +0200
From: Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@...il.com>
To: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	x86@...nel.org, Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>,
	Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
	John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
	Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
	Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@...cle.com>,
	David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
	Thomas Weißschuh <thomas@...ch.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 perf/core 13/22] selftests/bpf: Rename
 uprobe_syscall_executed prog to test_uretprobe_multi

On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 10:24:42AM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:

SNIP

> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/uprobe_syscall_executed.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/uprobe_syscall_executed.c
> > index 0d7f1a7db2e2..c4c3447378ba 100644
> > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/uprobe_syscall_executed.c
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/uprobe_syscall_executed.c
> > @@ -8,10 +8,17 @@ struct pt_regs regs;
> >  char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";
> >
> >  int executed = 0;
> > +int pid;
> >
> > -SEC("uretprobe.multi")
> > -int test(struct pt_regs *regs)
> > +static int inc_executed(void)
> >  {
> > -       executed = 1;
> > +       if (bpf_get_current_pid_tgid() >> 32 == pid)
> > +               executed++;
> 
> it's customary (and makes sense to me) with filtering like this to not
> add nestedness:
> 
> 
> if (bpf_get_current_pid_tgid() >> 32 != pid)
>     return 0;
> 
> executed += 1;
> return 0;

ok, will change

jirka

> 
> >         return 0;
> >  }
> > +
> > +SEC("uretprobe.multi")
> > +int test_uretprobe_multi(struct pt_regs *ctx)
> > +{
> > +       return inc_executed();
> > +}
> > --
> > 2.49.0
> >