linux-trace-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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


  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).