From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
To: linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rostedt@goodmis.org,
mhiramat@kernel.org
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, jolsa@kernel.org,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH v4 2/2] rethook: honor CONFIG_FTRACE_VALIDATE_RCU_IS_WATCHING in rethook_try_get()
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 12:09:09 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240418190909.704286-2-andrii@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240418190909.704286-1-andrii@kernel.org>
Take into account CONFIG_FTRACE_VALIDATE_RCU_IS_WATCHING when validating
that RCU is watching when trying to setup rethooko on a function entry.
One notable exception when we force rcu_is_watching() check is
CONFIG_KPROBE_EVENTS_ON_NOTRACE=y case, in which case kretprobes will use
old-style int3-based workflow instead of relying on ftrace, making RCU
watching check important to validate.
This further (in addition to improvements in the previous patch)
improves BPF multi-kretprobe (which rely on rethook) runtime throughput
by 2.3%, according to BPF benchmarks ([0]).
[0] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAEf4BzauQ2WKMjZdc9s0rBWa01BYbgwHN6aNDXQSHYia47pQ-w@mail.gmail.com/
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
---
kernel/trace/rethook.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/trace/rethook.c b/kernel/trace/rethook.c
index fa03094e9e69..a974605ad7a5 100644
--- a/kernel/trace/rethook.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/rethook.c
@@ -166,6 +166,7 @@ struct rethook_node *rethook_try_get(struct rethook *rh)
if (unlikely(!handler))
return NULL;
+#if defined(CONFIG_FTRACE_VALIDATE_RCU_IS_WATCHING) || defined(CONFIG_KPROBE_EVENTS_ON_NOTRACE)
/*
* This expects the caller will set up a rethook on a function entry.
* When the function returns, the rethook will eventually be reclaimed
@@ -174,6 +175,7 @@ struct rethook_node *rethook_try_get(struct rethook *rh)
*/
if (unlikely(!rcu_is_watching()))
return NULL;
+#endif
return (struct rethook_node *)objpool_pop(&rh->pool);
}
--
2.43.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-18 19:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-18 19:09 [PATCH v4 1/2] ftrace: make extra rcu_is_watching() validation check optional Andrii Nakryiko
2024-04-18 19:09 ` Andrii Nakryiko [this message]
2024-04-18 22:53 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] rethook: honor CONFIG_FTRACE_VALIDATE_RCU_IS_WATCHING in rethook_try_get() Paul E. McKenney
2024-04-19 1:00 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2024-04-19 17:59 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-04-21 2:40 ` Masami Hiramatsu
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=20240418190909.704286-2-andrii@kernel.org \
--to=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.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).