linux-api.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Deepak Gupta <debug@rivosinc.com>
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-man@vger.kernel.org,
	x86@kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
	Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>,
	John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"Borislav Petkov (AMD)" <bp@alien8.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
	"Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv6 bpf-next 0/9] uprobe: uretprobe speed up
Date: Tue, 21 May 2024 13:49:01 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zk0IvZU834RQ7YKp@debug.ba.rivosinc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240521104825.1060966-1-jolsa@kernel.org>

On Tue, May 21, 2024 at 12:48:16PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
>hi,
>as part of the effort on speeding up the uprobes [0] coming with
>return uprobe optimization by using syscall instead of the trap
>on the uretprobe trampoline.

I understand this provides an optimization on x86. I believe primary reason
is syscall is straight-line microcode and short sequence while trap delivery
still does all the GDT / IDT and segmentation checks and it makes delivery
of the trap slow.

So doing syscall improves that. Although it seems x86 is going to get rid of 
that as part of FRED [1, 2]. And linux kernel support for FRED is already upstream [2].
So I am imagining x86 hardware already exists with FRED support.

On other architectures, I believe trap delivery for breakpoint instruction
is same as syscall instruction.

Given that x86 trap delivery is pretty much going following the suit here and
intend to make trap delivery cost similar to syscall delivery.

Sorry for being buzzkill here but ...
Is it worth introducing this syscall which otherwise has no use on other arches
and x86 (and x86 kernel) has already taken steps to match trap delivery latency with
syscall latency would have similar cost?

Did you do any study of this on FRED enabled x86 CPUs?

[1] - https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/content-details/780121/flexible-return-and-event-delivery-fred-specification.html
[2] - https://docs.kernel.org/arch/x86/x86_64/fred.html

>
>The speed up depends on instruction type that uprobe is installed
>and depends on specific HW type, please check patch 1 for details.
>

  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-05-21 20:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-05-21 10:48 [PATCHv6 bpf-next 0/9] uprobe: uretprobe speed up Jiri Olsa
2024-05-21 10:48 ` [PATCHv6 bpf-next 1/9] x86/shstk: Make return uprobe work with shadow stack Jiri Olsa
2024-05-21 14:22   ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-05-21 16:54     ` Jiri Olsa
2024-05-30 23:04   ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2024-05-21 10:48 ` [PATCHv6 bpf-next 2/9] uprobe: Wire up uretprobe system call Jiri Olsa
2024-05-21 10:48 ` [PATCHv6 bpf-next 3/9] uprobe: Add uretprobe syscall to speed up return probe Jiri Olsa
2024-05-21 10:48 ` [PATCHv6 bpf-next 4/9] selftests/x86: Add return uprobe shadow stack test Jiri Olsa
2024-05-21 10:48 ` [PATCHv6 bpf-next 5/9] selftests/bpf: Add uretprobe syscall test for regs integrity Jiri Olsa
2024-05-21 10:48 ` [PATCHv6 bpf-next 6/9] selftests/bpf: Add uretprobe syscall test for regs changes Jiri Olsa
2024-05-21 10:48 ` [PATCHv6 bpf-next 7/9] selftests/bpf: Add uretprobe syscall call from user space test Jiri Olsa
2024-05-21 10:48 ` [PATCHv6 bpf-next 8/9] selftests/bpf: Add uretprobe shadow stack test Jiri Olsa
2024-05-21 10:48 ` [PATCHv6 9/9] man2: Add uretprobe syscall page Jiri Olsa
2024-05-21 11:36   ` Alejandro Colomar
2024-05-21 11:48     ` Jiri Olsa
2024-05-21 20:24       ` Jiri Olsa
2024-05-21 20:54         ` Alejandro Colomar
2024-05-22  7:54           ` Jiri Olsa
2024-05-22 10:59             ` Alejandro Colomar
2024-05-22 11:52               ` Jiri Olsa
2024-05-21 20:49 ` Deepak Gupta [this message]
2024-05-21 20:57   ` [PATCHv6 bpf-next 0/9] uprobe: uretprobe speed up Alexei Starovoitov
2024-05-22  8:55     ` Jiri Olsa

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=Zk0IvZU834RQ7YKp@debug.ba.rivosinc.com \
    --to=debug@rivosinc.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
    --cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-man@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=songliubraving@fb.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=yhs@fb.com \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).