From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B6E04370ACC; Wed, 2 Sep 2026 07:46:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788335182; cv=none; b=EIyqLIx1QIZsTQRmZU9Im/Exnm+bOf7oykek3dnUcRkDl7NkgvmMASd5oLq2j2caTTRVZDLLb8OhMkYdYV5v1zWKM8HBeJMGkFHVgiKAjvw1VUYrFOy7H7YzB1zSOLAB+RVjATUClRjg078EiV+BhBEDHZ+AtJMFKcdonUnUTKs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788335182; c=relaxed/simple; bh=29czV3fjjxBVQbNXJgxEZMzYgZW1biCPklSbU1r9VFU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=EMrJ3SSibZwJEy69wtA2y4mdf3h0ccWbOTI21/csZoDRXPQDSkp333ixZeSTXPZjFNFasmcvKGHl8ai1rnKDTZnz6K8XXQQ4qDfbS21eSc2Sg/A10KN1DvUchTW+/PATe3/2nz3qP3V1RiZw7AYBcErW1uCwJmoMi+LkJrvSO/E= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=Do35rUN1; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=a7XGseWt; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="Do35rUN1"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="a7XGseWt" From: Nam Cao DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1788335178; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=29czV3fjjxBVQbNXJgxEZMzYgZW1biCPklSbU1r9VFU=; b=Do35rUN1QqwaRhpAx6tTLLF9UE2JChbAdvhVfGYDAMbMcKcY6hcoZ3n08k2h5PqH6cbSTE iOYaz1TQEF016iyZag5zi8yBnZzdz/fDFNVTWe+cD15T0SVXrRT8EGvvR0/LLWDwsk9YGN Ag/V+ftFNkdsAxR72nv+zqFk8g2qAHgPxhEdu6FoSyVCSAt2NEhTlKnKVBdMsoqwurvJph NvQGbIoWfOe55EgGxbUYbEAakDm7OAaCkzMXdh/k6+KoFFP5j2yhgFgZyX4ZNmy+SJpdRP XGa8kLAPH6kIGD9UfXUV0cTUi5FDxJOQpOiz5FVH7Gh57U19czXmyfRTNirBgg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1788335178; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=29czV3fjjxBVQbNXJgxEZMzYgZW1biCPklSbU1r9VFU=; b=a7XGseWtGRSYJDkNDkn2iqJSSLEAeTU7RbPPZ84zWJsrP5ylW7MHFCI8zUwh6Ym886g1ys AZX52ao/WlUmHlCw== To: Gabriele Monaco , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org Cc: Steven Rostedt , Wen Yang , Tobias Schaffner , Viktor Malik Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/20] rv: Add support for BPF monitors In-Reply-To: References: <20260831090524.106845-1-gmonaco@redhat.com> <87se3sakgi.fsf@yellow.woof> Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2026 09:46:17 +0200 Message-ID: <8733vsw0xi.fsf@yellow.woof> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Gabriele Monaco writes: > I should definitely have included it in the cover letter.. I'm writing it > everywhere (will present at LPC) but forgot it here. > > Essentially BPF monitors can be pluggable, folks writing their own monitors > won't need to submit a patch or maintain a separate tree, which is useful for > domain-specific models. > By being pluggable you also don't need to reboot to use a new/updated monitor. > > Think of being able to distribute a more granular set of rules for RTapp, I > remember we had conversation along those lines, not all rules apply to all > contexts and what you send upstream has to be general, what you keep for > yourself doesn't. > > Having monitors in BPF brings also other perks over kernel modules: a whole > bunch of readily available probe types (uprobes, fprobes, all unexported > tracepoints that are cumbersome for modules), the map infrastructure for > allocation is arguably easier and the code is verified when loaded against > common issues (NULL pointer access, unbound loops, etc.). > > That said, I try to mimic as much as possible the in-kernel functionality, but > some things are not the same (event/error tracepoints). > > These support DA only because BPF loading needs a userspace component and the RV > tool doesn't support LTL and HA yet, there shouldn't be any technical reason not > to extend to those in the future. Cool. I also wanted to do something like this, for these exact same reasons. Let me look at your patches.. Nam