linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH perf/core 04/11] bpf: Add support to attach uprobe

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: <CAADnVQ+MntzHdwSe_Oqe7CU=E3yjko=7+9GTnapsPWwe4oqpsw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2025 09:11:22 -0700
From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, 
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, 
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, 
	linux-trace-kernel <linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, X86 ML <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>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH perf/core 04/11] bpf: Add support to attach uprobe_multi
 unique uprobe

On Tue, Sep 2, 2025 at 7:38 AM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Adding support to attach unique uprobe through uprobe multi link
> interface.
>
> Adding new BPF_F_UPROBE_MULTI_UNIQUE flag that denotes the unique
> uprobe creation.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
> ---
>  include/uapi/linux/bpf.h       | 3 ++-
>  kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c       | 4 +++-
>  tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h | 3 ++-
>  3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
> index 233de8677382..3de9eb469fe2 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
> @@ -1300,7 +1300,8 @@ enum {
>   * BPF_TRACE_UPROBE_MULTI attach type to create return probe.
>   */
>  enum {
> -       BPF_F_UPROBE_MULTI_RETURN = (1U << 0)
> +       BPF_F_UPROBE_MULTI_RETURN = (1U << 0),
> +       BPF_F_UPROBE_MULTI_UNIQUE = (1U << 1),

I second Masami's point. "exclusive" name fits better.
And once you use that name the "multi_exclusive"
part will not make sense.
How can an exclusive user of the uprobe be "multi" at the same time?
Like attaching to multiple uprobes and modifying regsiters
in all of them? Is it practical ?
It feels to me BPF_F_UPROBE_EXCLUSIVE should be targeting
one specific uprobe.