linux-doc.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@linux.ibm.com>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
Cc: oleg@redhat.com, srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
	peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, acme@kernel.org,
	alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com, jolsa@redhat.com,
	namhyung@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	corbet@lwn.net, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
	ananth@linux.vnet.ibm.com, alexis.berlemont@gmail.com,
	naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
	Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Uprobes: Support SDT markers having reference count (semaphore)
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 07:59:38 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <0d487b32-3141-ec30-6cca-eba7159d70b0@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180608101023.cbf20db485026213d490cb7c@kernel.org>

Hi Masami,

On 06/08/2018 06:40 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> On Wed,  6 Jun 2018 14:03:37 +0530
> Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
>> Why RFC again:
>>
>> This series is different from earlier versions[1]. Earlier series
>> implemented this feature in trace_uprobe while this has implemented
>> the logic in core uprobe. Few reasons for this:
>>  1. One of the major reason was the deadlock between uprobe_lock and
>>  mm->mmap inside trace_uprobe_mmap(). That deadlock was not easy to fix
>>  because mm->mmap is not in control of trace_uprobe_mmap() and it has
>>  to take uprobe_lock to loop over trace_uprobe list. More details can
>>  be found at[2]. With this new approach, there are no deadlocks found
>>  so far.
>>  2. Many of the core uprobe function and data-structures needs to be
>>  exported to make earlier implementation simple. With this new approach,
>>  reference counter logic is been implemented in core uprobe and thus
>>  no need to export anything.
> 
> I agree with you. Moreover, since uprobe_register/unregister() are
> exported to modules, this enablement would better be implemented
> inside uprobe so that all uprobe users benefit from this.


Sorry, I think you got me wrong. I meant, I don't need to expose all core
uprobe _static_ functions to tarce_uprobe.

Now, about kernel modules, basically uprobe_register() takes three parameters:
    inode, offset and consumer.
There is no scope for the reference counter there. So I've created one more
function: uprobe_register_refctr(). But this function is not exported as ABI
to kernel module. i.e. kernel modules still does not have a way to create
uprobe with reference counter. So for kernel modules,

is it fine to change current ABI from
    uprobe_register(inode, offset, consumer)
to
    uprobe_register(inode, offset, ref_ctr_offset, consumer)

Or I should introduce new function for this:
    uprobe_register_refctr(inode, offset, ref_ctr_offset, consumer)
and export it to kernel module?

What's your suggestion?

[...]

>> 
>>  - This patches still has one issue. If there are multiple instances of
>>    same application running and user wants to trace any particular
>>    instance, trace_uprobe is updating reference counter in all instances.
>>    This is not a problem on user side because instruction is not replaced
>>    with trap/int3 and thus user will only see samples from his interested
>>    process. But still this is more of a correctness issue. I'm working on
>>    a fix for this.
> 
> Hmm, it sounds like not a correctness issue, but there maybe a performace
> tradeoff. Tracing one particulear instance, other instances also will get
> a performance loss


Right, but it's temporary. I mean, putting everything in to this series was making
it complex. So this is the initial one and I'll send followup patches which will
optimize the reference counter update.


> (Only if the parameter preparation block is heavy,
> because the heaviest part of probing - trap/int3 and recording data - isn't
> executed.)
>> BTW, why this happens? I thought the refcounter part is just a data which
> is not shared among processes...
> 

This happens because we are not calling consumer_filter function. consumer_filter
is the one who decides whether to change the instruction to trap or not in a given
mm. We also need to call it before updating reference counter.

Let me know your thoughts.

Thanks,
Ravi

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

  reply	other threads:[~2018-06-08  2:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-06-06  8:33 [PATCH 0/7] Uprobes: Support SDT markers having reference count (semaphore) Ravi Bangoria
2018-06-06  8:33 ` [PATCH 1/7] Uprobes: Simplify uprobe_register() body Ravi Bangoria
2018-06-06  8:33 ` [PATCH 2/7] Uprobes: Support SDT markers having reference count (semaphore) Ravi Bangoria
2018-06-06  8:33 ` [PATCH 3/7] Uprobes/sdt: Fix multiple update of same reference counter Ravi Bangoria
2018-06-06  8:33 ` [PATCH 4/7] trace_uprobe/sdt: Prevent multiple reference counter for same uprobe Ravi Bangoria
2018-06-06  8:33 ` [PATCH 5/7] Uprobes/sdt: " Ravi Bangoria
2018-06-06  8:33 ` [PATCH 6/7] Uprobes/sdt: Document about reference counter Ravi Bangoria
2018-06-06  8:33 ` [PATCH 7/7] perf probe: Support SDT markers having reference counter (semaphore) Ravi Bangoria
2018-06-06  8:35 ` [PATCH 0/7] Uprobes: Support SDT markers having reference count (semaphore) Ravi Bangoria
2018-06-08  1:10 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2018-06-08  2:29   ` Ravi Bangoria [this message]
2018-06-08  5:14     ` Masami Hiramatsu
2018-06-08  6:34       ` Ravi Bangoria
2018-06-08 15:45         ` Masami Hiramatsu
2018-06-11  4:31           ` Ravi Bangoria
2018-06-16 13:50             ` Masami Hiramatsu
2018-06-16 15:07               ` Ravi Bangoria
2018-06-08 16:36 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-06-11  4:13   ` Ravi Bangoria
2018-06-20 16:37 ` Steven Rostedt
2018-06-21  2:35   ` Ravi Bangoria

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=0d487b32-3141-ec30-6cca-eba7159d70b0@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=ravi.bangoria@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=alexis.berlemont@gmail.com \
    --cc=ananth@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
    --cc=naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.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).