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: <CAADnVQLLcH1weL24BJv=K5cSijNzjgWq5LM2=GCyM6bid2m0ag@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2025 08:32:14 -0700
From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To: Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@...il.com>
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 11:35 PM Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 02, 2025 at 09:11:22AM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > 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 ?
>
> we can still attach single uprobe with uprobe_multi,
> but for more uprobes it's probably not practical
>
> > It till attach single uprobe with eels to me BPF_F_UPROBE_EXCLUSIVE should be targeting
> > one specific uprobe.
>
> do you mean to force single uprobe with this flag?
>
> I understood 'BPF_F_UPROBE_MULTI_' flag prefix more as indication what link
> it belongs to, but I'm ok with BPF_F_UPROBE_EXCLUSIVE

What is the use case for attaching the same bpf prog to multiple
uprobes and modifying their registers?