From: Artem Savkov <asavkov@redhat.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] tracing: change syscall number type in struct syscall_trace_*
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2023 14:55:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231004125547.GA409268@alecto.usersys.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231003213844.1de0c138@gandalf.local.home>
On Tue, Oct 03, 2023 at 09:38:44PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Oct 2023 15:52:42 +0200
> Artem Savkov <asavkov@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > linux-rt-devel tree contains a patch that adds an extra member to struct
> > trace_entry. This causes the offset of args field in struct
> > trace_event_raw_sys_enter be different from the one in struct
> > syscall_trace_enter:
>
> This patch looks like it's fixing the symptom and not the issue. No code
> should rely on the two event structures to be related. That's an unwanted
> coupling, that will likely cause issues down the road (like the RT patch
> you mentioned).
I agree, but I didn't see a better solution and that was my way of
starting conversation, thus the RFC.
> >
> > struct trace_event_raw_sys_enter {
> > struct trace_entry ent; /* 0 12 */
> >
> > /* XXX last struct has 3 bytes of padding */
> > /* XXX 4 bytes hole, try to pack */
> >
> > long int id; /* 16 8 */
> > long unsigned int args[6]; /* 24 48 */
> > /* --- cacheline 1 boundary (64 bytes) was 8 bytes ago --- */
> > char __data[]; /* 72 0 */
> >
> > /* size: 72, cachelines: 2, members: 4 */
> > /* sum members: 68, holes: 1, sum holes: 4 */
> > /* paddings: 1, sum paddings: 3 */
> > /* last cacheline: 8 bytes */
> > };
> >
> > struct syscall_trace_enter {
> > struct trace_entry ent; /* 0 12 */
> >
> > /* XXX last struct has 3 bytes of padding */
> >
> > int nr; /* 12 4 */
> > long unsigned int args[]; /* 16 0 */
> >
> > /* size: 16, cachelines: 1, members: 3 */
> > /* paddings: 1, sum paddings: 3 */
> > /* last cacheline: 16 bytes */
> > };
> >
> > This, in turn, causes perf_event_set_bpf_prog() fail while running bpf
> > test_profiler testcase because max_ctx_offset is calculated based on the
> > former struct, while off on the latter:
>
> The above appears to be pointing to the real bug. The "is calculated based
> on the former struct while off on the latter" Why are the two being used
> together? They are supposed to be *unrelated*!
>
>
> >
> > 10488 if (is_tracepoint || is_syscall_tp) {
> > 10489 int off = trace_event_get_offsets(event->tp_event);
>
> So basically this is clumping together the raw_syscalls with the syscalls
> events as if they are the same. But the are not. They are created
> differently. It's basically like using one structure to get the offsets of
> another structure. That would be a bug anyplace else in the kernel. Sounds
> like it's a bug here too.
>
> I think the issue is with this code, not the tracing code.
>
> We could expose the struct syscall_trace_enter and syscall_trace_exit if
> the offsets to those are needed.
I don't think we need syscall_trace_* offsets, looks like
trace_event_get_offsets() should return offset trace_event_raw_sys_enter
instead. I am still trying to figure out how all of this works together.
Maybe Alexei or Andrii have more context here.
--
Artem
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-04 12:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-02 13:52 [RFC PATCH] tracing: change syscall number type in struct syscall_trace_* Artem Savkov
2023-10-03 22:11 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-04 7:02 ` Artem Savkov
2023-10-04 1:38 ` Steven Rostedt
2023-10-04 12:55 ` Artem Savkov [this message]
2023-10-05 12:34 ` Artem Savkov
2023-10-12 11:45 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next] bpf: change syscall_nr type to int in struct syscall_tp_t Artem Savkov
2023-10-12 13:44 ` Steven Rostedt
2023-10-12 23:32 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-13 5:42 ` [PATCH " Artem Savkov
2023-10-13 19:50 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
2023-10-13 6:01 ` [RFC PATCH " Artem Savkov
2023-10-13 14:00 ` Steven Rostedt
2023-10-13 19:43 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-16 15:53 ` Steven Rostedt
2023-10-13 3:13 ` Rod Webster
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20231004125547.GA409268@alecto.usersys.redhat.com \
--to=asavkov@redhat.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.