linux-trace-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
To: "Liao, Chang" <liaochang1@huawei.com>
Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
	linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org,  peterz@infradead.org,
	oleg@redhat.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,  mhiramat@kernel.org,
	bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	 jolsa@kernel.org, paulmck@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] perf/uprobe: split uprobe_unregister()
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2024 08:05:18 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAEf4BzZR6a4OSqsvyci0_-P+_o2PErM_PyC9y9eSc4J4A+Uabw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <eb6d1474-a292-af20-b8b1-1c2de61405f4@huawei.com>

On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 7:41 PM Liao, Chang <liaochang1@huawei.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> 在 2024/8/1 5:42, Andrii Nakryiko 写道:
> > From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> >
> > With uprobe_unregister() having grown a synchronize_srcu(), it becomes
> > fairly slow to call. Esp. since both users of this API call it in a
> > loop.
> >
> > Peel off the sync_srcu() and do it once, after the loop.
> >
> > With recent uprobe_register()'s error handling reusing full
> > uprobe_unregister() call, we need to be careful about returning to the
> > caller before we have a guarantee that partially attached consumer won't
> > be called anymore. So add uprobe_unregister_sync() in the error handling
> > path. This is an unlikely slow path and this should be totally fine to
> > be slow in the case of an failed attach.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
> > Co-developed-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
> > ---
> >  include/linux/uprobes.h                        |  8 ++++++--
> >  kernel/events/uprobes.c                        | 18 ++++++++++++++----
> >  kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c                       |  5 ++++-
> >  kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c                    |  6 +++++-
> >  .../selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c    |  3 ++-
> >  5 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/uprobes.h b/include/linux/uprobes.h
> > index a1686c1ebcb6..8f1999eb9d9f 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/uprobes.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/uprobes.h
> > @@ -105,7 +105,8 @@ extern unsigned long uprobe_get_trap_addr(struct pt_regs *regs);
> >  extern int uprobe_write_opcode(struct arch_uprobe *auprobe, struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long vaddr, uprobe_opcode_t);
> >  extern struct uprobe *uprobe_register(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset, loff_t ref_ctr_offset, struct uprobe_consumer *uc);
> >  extern int uprobe_apply(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct uprobe_consumer *uc, bool);
> > -extern void uprobe_unregister(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct uprobe_consumer *uc);
> > +extern void uprobe_unregister_nosync(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct uprobe_consumer *uc);
> > +extern void uprobe_unregister_sync(void);
>
> [...]
>
> >  static inline void
> > -uprobe_unregister(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct uprobe_consumer *uc)
> > +uprobe_unregister_nosync(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct uprobe_consumer *uc)
> > +{
> > +}
> > +static inline void uprobes_unregister_sync(void)
>
> *uprobes*_unregister_sync, is it a typo?
>

I think the idea behind this is that you do a lot of individual uprobe
unregistrations with multiple uprobe_unregister() calls, and then
follow with a single *uprobes*_unregister_sync(), because in general
it is meant to sync multiple uprobes unregistrations.

> >  {
> >  }
> >  static inline int uprobe_mmap(struct vm_area_struct *vma)
> > diff --git a/kernel/events/uprobes.c b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
> > index 3b42fd355256..b0488d356399 100644
> > --- a/kernel/events/uprobes.c
> > +++ b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
> > @@ -1089,11 +1089,11 @@ register_for_each_vma(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct uprobe_consumer *new)
> >  }
> >
> >  /**
> > - * uprobe_unregister - unregister an already registered probe.
> > + * uprobe_unregister_nosync - unregister an already registered probe.
> >   * @uprobe: uprobe to remove
> >   * @uc: identify which probe if multiple probes are colocated.
> >   */
> > -void uprobe_unregister(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct uprobe_consumer *uc)
> > +void uprobe_unregister_nosync(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct uprobe_consumer *uc)
> >  {
> >       int err;
> >
> > @@ -1109,10 +1109,14 @@ void uprobe_unregister(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct uprobe_consumer *uc)
> >               return;
> >
> >       put_uprobe(uprobe);
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(uprobe_unregister_nosync);
> >
> > +void uprobe_unregister_sync(void)
> > +{
> >       synchronize_srcu(&uprobes_srcu);
> >  }
> > -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(uprobe_unregister);
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(uprobe_unregister_sync);
> >
> >  /**
> >   * uprobe_register - register a probe
> > @@ -1170,7 +1174,13 @@ struct uprobe *uprobe_register(struct inode *inode,
> >       up_write(&uprobe->register_rwsem);
> >
> >       if (ret) {
> > -             uprobe_unregister(uprobe, uc);
> > +             uprobe_unregister_nosync(uprobe, uc);
> > +             /*
> > +              * Registration might have partially succeeded, so we can have
> > +              * this consumer being called right at this time. We need to
> > +              * sync here. It's ok, it's unlikely slow path.
> > +              */
> > +             uprobe_unregister_sync();
> >               return ERR_PTR(ret);
> >       }
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
> > index 73c570b5988b..6b632710c98e 100644
> > --- a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
> > +++ b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
> > @@ -3184,7 +3184,10 @@ static void bpf_uprobe_unregister(struct bpf_uprobe *uprobes, u32 cnt)
> >       u32 i;
> >
> >       for (i = 0; i < cnt; i++)
> > -             uprobe_unregister(uprobes[i].uprobe, &uprobes[i].consumer);
> > +             uprobe_unregister_nosync(uprobes[i].uprobe, &uprobes[i].consumer);
> > +
> > +     if (cnt)
> > +             uprobe_unregister_sync();
> >  }
> >
> >  static void bpf_uprobe_multi_link_release(struct bpf_link *link)
> > diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
> > index 7eb79e0a5352..f7443e996b1b 100644
> > --- a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
> > +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
> > @@ -1097,6 +1097,7 @@ static int trace_uprobe_enable(struct trace_uprobe *tu, filter_func_t filter)
> >  static void __probe_event_disable(struct trace_probe *tp)
> >  {
> >       struct trace_uprobe *tu;
> > +     bool sync = false;
> >
> >       tu = container_of(tp, struct trace_uprobe, tp);
> >       WARN_ON(!uprobe_filter_is_empty(tu->tp.event->filter));
> > @@ -1105,9 +1106,12 @@ static void __probe_event_disable(struct trace_probe *tp)
> >               if (!tu->uprobe)
> >                       continue;
> >
> > -             uprobe_unregister(tu->uprobe, &tu->consumer);
> > +             uprobe_unregister_nosync(tu->uprobe, &tu->consumer);
> > +             sync = true;
> >               tu->uprobe = NULL;
> >       }
> > +     if (sync)
> > +             uprobe_unregister_sync();
> >  }
> >
> >  static int probe_event_enable(struct trace_event_call *call,
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c
> > index 73a6b041bcce..928c73cde32e 100644
> > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c
> > @@ -478,7 +478,8 @@ static void testmod_unregister_uprobe(void)
> >       mutex_lock(&testmod_uprobe_mutex);
> >
> >       if (uprobe.uprobe) {
> > -             uprobe_unregister(uprobe.uprobe, &uprobe.consumer);
> > +             uprobe_unregister_nosync(uprobe.uprobe, &uprobe.consumer);
> > +             uprobe_unregister_sync();
> >               uprobe.offset = 0;
> >               uprobe.uprobe = NULL;
> >       }
>
> --
> BR
> Liao, Chang

  reply	other threads:[~2024-08-02 15:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-07-31 21:42 [PATCH 0/8] uprobes: RCU-protected hot path optimizations Andrii Nakryiko
2024-07-31 21:42 ` [PATCH 1/8] rbtree: provide rb_find_rcu() / rb_find_add_rcu() Andrii Nakryiko
2024-07-31 21:42 ` [PATCH 2/8] uprobes: revamp uprobe refcounting and lifetime management Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-01 11:09   ` Jiri Olsa
2024-08-01 16:49     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-01 22:07   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-02  8:50     ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-08-02 14:58       ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-02 22:19         ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-08-02 11:11   ` Jiri Olsa
2024-08-02 15:03     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-05 13:44   ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-08-05 17:29     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-06 10:45       ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-07-31 21:42 ` [PATCH 3/8] uprobes: protected uprobe lifetime with SRCU Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-01 12:23   ` Liao, Chang
2024-08-01 16:49     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-02  1:30       ` Liao, Chang
2024-08-05 14:51   ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-08-05 17:31     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-07-31 21:42 ` [PATCH 4/8] uprobes: get rid of enum uprobe_filter_ctx in uprobe filter callbacks Andrii Nakryiko
2024-07-31 21:42 ` [PATCH 5/8] uprobes: travers uprobe's consumer list locklessly under SRCU protection Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-01 14:27   ` Jiri Olsa
2024-08-01 16:49     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-05 15:59   ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-08-05 17:31     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-06 10:54       ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-07-31 21:42 ` [PATCH 6/8] perf/uprobe: split uprobe_unregister() Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-02  2:41   ` Liao, Chang
2024-08-02 15:05     ` Andrii Nakryiko [this message]
2024-08-05 20:01       ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-06  1:50         ` Liao, Chang
2024-08-07 13:17   ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-08-07 15:24     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-07-31 21:42 ` [PATCH 7/8] uprobes: perform lockless SRCU-protected uprobes_tree lookup Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-07 17:14   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-08 10:04     ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-08-08 14:29     ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-08-08 17:00       ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-08 13:40   ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-08-10 14:00     ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-07-31 21:42 ` [PATCH 8/8] uprobes: switch to RCU Tasks Trace flavor for better performance Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-01  9:35   ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-08-01 16:49     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-01 18:05     ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-08-07 13:29 ` [PATCH 0/8] uprobes: RCU-protected hot path optimizations Oleg Nesterov
2024-08-07 15:24   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-07 17:11     ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-08-07 17:31       ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-08-07 18:24         ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-08-08  7:51         ` Liao, Chang

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=CAEf4BzZR6a4OSqsvyci0_-P+_o2PErM_PyC9y9eSc4J4A+Uabw@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
    --cc=liaochang1@huawei.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.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).