[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <11ef74f9-b0ef-264f-f582-62a8c8f1f027@fb.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2017 16:08:07 -1000
From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>
To: Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>, <peterz@...radead.org>,
<rostedt@...dmis.org>, <daniel@...earbox.net>,
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>
CC: <kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 1/2] bpf: add support for sys_enter_* and
sys_exit_* tracepoints
On 8/3/17 6:29 AM, Yonghong Song wrote:
> @@ -578,8 +596,9 @@ static void perf_syscall_enter(void *ignore, struct pt_regs *regs, long id)
> if (!sys_data)
> return;
>
> + prog = READ_ONCE(sys_data->enter_event->prog);
> head = this_cpu_ptr(sys_data->enter_event->perf_events);
> - if (hlist_empty(head))
> + if (!prog && hlist_empty(head))
> return;
>
> /* get the size after alignment with the u32 buffer size field */
> @@ -594,6 +613,13 @@ static void perf_syscall_enter(void *ignore, struct pt_regs *regs, long id)
> rec->nr = syscall_nr;
> syscall_get_arguments(current, regs, 0, sys_data->nb_args,
> (unsigned long *)&rec->args);
> +
> + if ((prog && !perf_call_bpf_enter(prog, regs, sys_data, rec)) ||
> + hlist_empty(head)) {
> + perf_swevent_put_recursion_context(rctx);
> + return;
> + }
hmm. if I read the patch correctly that makes it different from
kprobe/uprobe/tracepoints+bpf behavior. Why make it different and
force user space to perf_event_open() on every cpu?
In other cases it's the job of the bpf program to filter by cpu
if necessary and that is well understood by bcc scripts.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists