From: Artem Savkov <asavkov@redhat.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
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: Thu, 5 Oct 2023 14:34:13 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231005123413.GA488417@alecto.usersys.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231004125547.GA409268@alecto.usersys.redhat.com>
On Wed, Oct 04, 2023 at 02:55:47PM +0200, Artem Savkov wrote:
> 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.
Turns out it is even more confusing. The tests dereference the context as
struct trace_event_raw_sys_enter so bpf verifier sets max_ctx_offset
based on that, then perf_event_set_bpf_prog() checks this offset against
the one in struct syscall_trace_enter, but what bpf prog really gets is
a pointer to struct syscall_tp_t from kernel/trace/trace_syscalls.c.
I don't know the history behind these decisions, but should the tests
dereference context as struct syscall_trace_enter instead and struct
syscall_tp_t be changed to have syscall_nr as int?
--
Artem
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-05 14:36 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
2023-10-05 12:34 ` Artem Savkov [this message]
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=20231005123413.GA488417@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 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).