[lkml]   [2013]   [Jan]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [GIT PULL] uprobes: pre-filtering

* Oleg Nesterov <> wrote:

> Ingo, please pull from
> git:// uprobes/core
> Mostly pre-filtering. This needs more work and perhaps more functionality.
> In particular, perhaps dup_mmap() should remove the unwanted breakpoints.
> And we can add more ->filter() hooks to, say, speedup uprobe_register().
> Plus we can do some optimizations to avoid register_for_each_vma() in
> case when we know that all mm's were previously acked/nacked.
> Srikar, the only patch you did not ack explicitely is 1fecb96d
> "Do not allocate current->utask unnecessary", but afaics you do not
> object.
> And the patch from Josh which exports uprobe_register/unregister for modules.
> Christoph (cc'ed) doesn't like this change, but I disagree. Whatever you
> think about systemtap it is the widely used tool, and uprobes can have other
> out-of-tree users. This is like kprobes, kprobe_register() is exported but
> it doesn't have a modular in-kernel user too. I do not see why should we
> limit the usage of uprobes.
> Josh Stone (1):
> uprobes: Add exports for module use
> Oleg Nesterov (26):
> uprobes: Move __set_bit(UPROBE_SKIP_SSTEP) into alloc_uprobe()
> uprobes: Kill the "uprobe != NULL" check in uprobe_unregister()
> uprobes: Kill the pointless inode/uc checks in register/unregister
> uprobes: Kill uprobe_consumer->filter()
> uprobes: Introduce filter_chain()
> uprobes: _unregister() should always do register_for_each_vma(false)
> uprobes: _register() should always do register_for_each_vma(true)
> uprobes: Introduce uprobe->register_rwsem
> uprobes: Change filter_chain() to iterate ->consumers list
> uprobes: Kill UPROBE_RUN_HANDLER flag
> uprobes: Kill uprobe->copy_mutex
> uprobes: Kill uprobe_events, use RB_EMPTY_ROOT() instead
> uprobes: Introduce uprobe_is_active()
> uprobes: Kill uprobes_mutex[], separate alloc_uprobe() and __uprobe_register()
> uprobes: Rationalize the usage of filter_chain()
> uprobes: Reintroduce uprobe_consumer->filter()
> uprobes: Teach handler_chain() to filter out the probed task
> uprobes/x86: Change __skip_sstep() to actually skip the whole insn
> uprobes: Change handle_swbp() to expose bp_vaddr to handler_chain()
> uprobes: Move alloc_page() from xol_add_vma() to xol_alloc_area()
> uprobes: Fold xol_alloc_area() into get_xol_area()
> uprobes: Turn add_utask() into get_utask()
> uprobes: Do not play with utask in xol_get_insn_slot()
> uprobes: Fix utask->xol_vaddr leak in pre_ssout()
> uprobes: Do not allocate current->utask unnecessary
> uprobes: Kill the bogus IS_ERR_VALUE(xol_vaddr) check
> arch/x86/kernel/uprobes.c | 4 +-
> include/linux/uprobes.h | 17 ++-
> kernel/events/uprobes.c | 433 ++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
> kernel/ptrace.c | 6 +
> kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c | 5 +-
> 5 files changed, 243 insertions(+), 222 deletions(-)

The kernel side looks good to me - but how does 'perf uprobe'
make use of it in practice, how can I test it?



 \ /
  Last update: 2013-01-24 13:44    [W:0.072 / U:1.004 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site