From: masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com (Masami Hiramatsu)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v6 0/7] ARM: kprobes: enable OPTPROBES for ARM 32.
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 09:52:11 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5449A2BB.1020207@hitachi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1413977525-51480-1-git-send-email-wangnan0@huawei.com>
(2014/10/22 20:31), Wang Nan wrote:
> Previous 5 version of ARM OPTPROBES patches are unable to deal with
> stack storing instructions correctly. V5 patches disallow optimizing
> every protential stack store instructions based on pessimistic
> assumption. Which, as Tixy comments, 'excludes the main use of
> kprobes'. (https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/29/117 )
>
> The main obstacle which prevents us from computing stack requirement is
> the missing of per-instruction decoder in probes_decode_insn() and its
> friends. Only part of instructions have their decoders (and not in
> each case).
>
> In this patch series, I propose 'checker', which allows us define
> functions for each type of instruction, extract more information. Stack
> consumption computing is an example. Checker can be further employed to
> determine whether one instruction is possible to execute directy in
> optimized kprobe. I'd like to expand current checker framework by
> chaining checkers together. After that, I believe most of ARM
> instructions can be executed directly like x86, kprobe performace can be
> improved.
>
> The first 3 patches introduces checker. After that, patch 4/7 checks
> stack requirement for probed instructions. Patches 5/7 - 7/7 are similar
> to patch v5, except:
>
> 1. As Tixy proposed, unoptimized probes are also suffer from stack
> problem (https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/9/1/548 ). Commit d30a0c8b saves
> 64 bytes for them, but for instruction use register addressing (like
> 'str r0, [sp, r1]'), 64 bytes are unsafe. Patch 5/7 prohibit such
> probing according to stack information collected by checker.
By the way, this sounds like a bugfix rather than an improvement.
Is it possible to separate 1/7-5/7 as a bugfix series? I think those
should go to 3.18.
Thank you,
--
Masami HIRAMATSU
Software Platform Research Dept. Linux Technology Research Center
Hitachi, Ltd., Yokohama Research Laboratory
E-mail: masami.hiramatsu.pt at hitachi.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-24 0:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-10-22 11:31 [PATCH v6 0/7] ARM: kprobes: enable OPTPROBES for ARM 32 Wang Nan
2014-10-22 11:31 ` [PATCH v6 1/7] ARM: kprobes: replace 'union decode_action' to 'struct decode_action' Wang Nan
2014-10-22 11:32 ` [PATCH v6 2/7] ARM: kprobes: seprates load and store actions Wang Nan
2014-10-22 11:32 ` [PATCH v6 3/7] ARM: kprobes: introduces checker Wang Nan
2014-10-22 11:32 ` [PATCH v6 4/7] ARM: kprobes: collects stack consumption for store instructions Wang Nan
2014-10-22 11:32 ` [PATCH v6 5/7] ARM: kprobes: disallow probing stack consuming instructions Wang Nan
2014-10-22 11:32 ` [PATCH v6 6/7] kprobes: copy ainsn after alloc aggr kprobe Wang Nan
2014-10-22 11:32 ` [PATCH v6 7/7] ARM: kprobes: enable OPTPROBES for ARM 32 Wang Nan
2014-10-24 0:52 ` Masami Hiramatsu [this message]
2014-10-24 9:02 ` [PATCH v6 0/7] " Jon Medhurst (Tixy)
2014-10-25 9:49 ` Wang Nan
2014-10-27 17:17 ` Jon Medhurst (Tixy)
2014-10-28 10:58 ` Jon Medhurst (Tixy)
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=5449A2BB.1020207@hitachi.com \
--to=masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).