Re: [RFC 0/6] uprobes: kill uprobes_srcu/uprobe_srcu_id

[Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>]

On 04/16, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2012-04-16 at 01:44 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> > And. I have another reason for down_write() in register/unregister.
> > I am still not sure this is possible (I had no time to try to
> > implement), but it seems to me we can kill the uprobe counter in
> > mm_struct.
>
> You mean by making register/unregister down_write, you're exclusive with
> munmap()

.. and with register/unregister.

Why do we need mm->uprobes_state.count? It is writeonly, except we
check it in the DIE_INT3 notifier before anything else to avoid the
unnecessary uprobes overhead.

Suppose we kill it, and add the new MMF_HAS_UPROBE flag instead.
install_breakpoint() sets it unconditionally,
uprobe_pre_sstep_notifier() checks it.

(And perhaps we can stop right here? I mean how often this can
 slow down the debugger which installs int3 in the same mm?)

Now we need to clear MMF_HAS_UPROBE somehowe, when the last
uprobe goes away. Lets ignore uprobe_map/unmap for simplicity.

	- We add another flag, MMF_UPROBE_RECALC, it is set by
	  remove_breakpoint().

	- We change handle_swbp(). Ignoring all details it does:

		if (find_uprobe(vaddr))
			process_uprobe();
		else if (test_bit(MMF_HAS_UPROBE) && test_bit(MMF_UPROBE_RECALC))
			recalc_mmf_uprobe_flag();

	  where recalc_mmf_uprobe_flag() checks all vmas and either
	  clears both flags or MMF_UPROBE_RECALC only.

	  This is the really slow O(n) path, but it can only happen after
	  unregister, and only if we hit another non-uprobe breakpoint
	  in the same mm.

Something like this. What do you think?

Oleg.

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>