From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Cc: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
kasan-dev@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] tracing: Add task_prctl_unknown tracepoint
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2024 11:04:17 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20241107110417.7850d68f@gandalf.local.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3326c8a1-36c7-476b-8afa-2957f5bd5426@efficios.com>
On Thu, 7 Nov 2024 10:52:37 -0500
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> wrote:
> I suspect you base the overhead analysis on the x86-64 implementation
> of sys_enter/exit tracepoint and especially the overhead caused by
> the SYSCALL_WORK_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT thread flag, am I correct ?
>
> If that is causing a too large overhead, we should investigate if
> those can be improved instead of adding tracepoints in the
> implementation of system calls.
That would be great to get better, but the reason I'm not against this
patch is because prctl() is not a normal system call. It's basically an
ioctl() for Linux, and very vague. It's basically the garbage system call
when you don't know what to do. It's even being proposed for the sframe
work.
I understand your sentiment and agree. I don't want any random system call
to get a tracepoint attached to it. But here I'd make an exception.
-- Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-11-07 16:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-11-07 12:25 [PATCH v2 1/2] tracing: Add task_prctl_unknown tracepoint Marco Elver
2024-11-07 12:25 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] tracing: Remove pid in task_rename tracing output Marco Elver
2024-11-07 15:34 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] tracing: Add task_prctl_unknown tracepoint Steven Rostedt
2024-11-07 15:46 ` Marco Elver
2024-11-07 15:44 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2024-11-07 15:46 ` Marco Elver
2024-11-07 15:52 ` Steven Rostedt
2024-11-07 15:52 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2024-11-07 15:57 ` Marco Elver
2024-11-07 16:04 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2024-11-07 16:36 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
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=20241107110417.7850d68f@gandalf.local.home \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=elver@google.com \
--cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.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).