From: Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@gmail.com>
To: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net,
martin.lau@kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf 3/5] libbpf: detect broken PID filtering logic for multi-uprobe
Date: Tue, 21 May 2024 12:04:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zkxxsx6WQ4H-r6Lt@krava> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240520234720.1748918-4-andrii@kernel.org>
On Mon, May 20, 2024 at 04:47:18PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> Libbpf is automatically (and transparently to user) detecting
> multi-uprobe support in the kernel, and, if supported, uses
> multi-uprobes to improve USDT attachment speed.
>
> USDTs can be attached system-wide or for the specific process by PID. In
> the latter case, we rely on correct kernel logic of not triggering USDT
> for unrelated processes.
>
> As such, on older kernels that do support multi-uprobes, but still have
> broken PID filtering logic, we need to fall back to singular uprobes.
>
> Unfortunately, whether user is using PID filtering or not is known at
> the attachment time, which happens after relevant BPF programs were
> loaded into the kernel. Also unfortunately, we need to make a call
> whether to use multi-uprobes or singular uprobe for SEC("usdt") programs
> during BPF object load time, at which point we have no information about
> possible PID filtering.
>
> The distinction between single and multi-uprobes is small, but important
> for the kernel. Multi-uprobes get BPF_TRACE_UPROBE_MULTI attach type,
> and kernel internally substitiute different implementation of some of
> BPF helpers (e.g., bpf_get_attach_cookie()) depending on whether uprobe
> is multi or singular. So, multi-uprobes and singular uprobes cannot be
> intermixed.
>
> All the above implies that we have to make an early and conservative
> call about the use of multi-uprobes. And so this patch modifies libbpf's
> existing feature detector for multi-uprobe support to also check correct
> PID filtering. If PID filtering is not yet fixed, we fall back to
> singular uprobes for USDTs.
>
> This extension to feature detection is simple thanks to kernel's -EINVAL
> addition for pid < 0.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
> ---
> tools/lib/bpf/features.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/features.c b/tools/lib/bpf/features.c
> index a336786a22a3..cff8640ca66f 100644
> --- a/tools/lib/bpf/features.c
> +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/features.c
> @@ -392,11 +392,40 @@ static int probe_uprobe_multi_link(int token_fd)
> link_fd = bpf_link_create(prog_fd, -1, BPF_TRACE_UPROBE_MULTI, &link_opts);
> err = -errno; /* close() can clobber errno */
>
> + if (link_fd >= 0 || err != -EBADF) {
> + close(link_fd);
> + close(prog_fd);
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
> + /* Initial multi-uprobe support in kernel didn't handle PID filtering
> + * correctly (it was doing thread filtering, not process filtering).
> + * So now we'll detect if PID filtering logic was fixed, and, if not,
> + * we'll pretend multi-uprobes are not supported, if not.
> + * Multi-uprobes are used in USDT attachment logic, and we need to be
> + * conservative here, because multi-uprobe selection happens early at
> + * load time, while the use of PID filtering is known late at
> + * attachment time, at which point it's too late to undo multi-uprobe
> + * selection.
> + *
> + * Creating uprobe with pid == -1 for (invalid) '/' binary will fail
> + * early with -EINVAL on kernels with fixed PID filtering logic;
> + * otherwise -ESRCH would be returned if passed correct binary path
> + * (but we'll just get -BADF, of course).
> + */
> + link_opts.uprobe_multi.pid = -1, /* invalid PID */
^ s/,/;/
so this affects just USDT load/attach, you right?
Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
thanks,
jirka
> + link_opts.uprobe_multi.path = "/"; /* invalid path */
> + link_opts.uprobe_multi.offsets = &offset;
> + link_opts.uprobe_multi.cnt = 1;
> +
> + link_fd = bpf_link_create(prog_fd, -1, BPF_TRACE_UPROBE_MULTI, &link_opts);
> + err = -errno; /* close() can clobber errno */
> +
> if (link_fd >= 0)
> close(link_fd);
> close(prog_fd);
>
> - return link_fd < 0 && err == -EBADF;
> + return link_fd < 0 && err == -EINVAL;
> }
>
> static int probe_kern_bpf_cookie(int token_fd)
> --
> 2.43.0
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-21 10:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-20 23:47 [PATCH bpf 0/5] Fix BPF multi-uprobe PID filtering logic Andrii Nakryiko
2024-05-20 23:47 ` [PATCH bpf 1/5] bpf: fix " Andrii Nakryiko
2024-05-21 10:04 ` Jiri Olsa
2024-05-20 23:47 ` [PATCH bpf 2/5] bpf: remove unnecessary rcu_read_{lock,unlock}() in multi-uprobe attach logic Andrii Nakryiko
2024-05-21 10:04 ` Jiri Olsa
2024-05-20 23:47 ` [PATCH bpf 3/5] libbpf: detect broken PID filtering logic for multi-uprobe Andrii Nakryiko
2024-05-21 10:04 ` Jiri Olsa [this message]
2024-05-21 16:12 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-05-20 23:47 ` [PATCH bpf 4/5] selftests/bpf: extend multi-uprobe tests with child thread case Andrii Nakryiko
2024-05-20 23:47 ` [PATCH bpf 5/5] selftests/bpf: extend multi-uprobe tests with USDTs Andrii Nakryiko
2024-05-21 4:54 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-05-21 5:05 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2024-05-21 10:04 ` Jiri Olsa
2024-05-21 16:13 ` Andrii Nakryiko
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=Zkxxsx6WQ4H-r6Lt@krava \
--to=olsajiri@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox