Re: [PATCH v13 bpf-next 0/1] fprobe: Introduce fprobe function entry/exit probe

Masami Hiramatsu
2022-03-23T14:55:53Z

On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 14:18:40 +0000
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 11:34:46AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > Hi,
>
> Hi Masami,
>
> > Here is the 13th version of rethook x86 port. This is developed for a part
> > of fprobe series [1] for hooking function return. But since I forgot to send
> > it to arch maintainers, that caused conflict with IBT and SLS mitigation series.
> > Now I picked the x86 rethook part and send it to x86 maintainers to be
> > reviewed.
> >
> > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/164735281449.1084943.12438881786173547153.stgit@devnote2/T/#u
>
> As mentioned elsewhere, I have similar (though not identical) concerns
> to Peter for the arm64 patch, which was equally unreviewed by
> maintainers, and the overall structure.

Yes, those should be reviewed by arch maintainers.

>
> > Note that this patch is still for the bpf-next since the rethook itself
> > is on the bpf-next tree. But since this also uses the ANNOTATE_NOENDBR
> > macro which has been introduced by IBT/ENDBR patch, to build this series
> > you need to merge the tip/master branch with the bpf-next.
> > (hopefully, it is rebased soon)
>
> I thought we were going to drop the series from the bpf-next tree so
> that this could all go through review it had missed thusfar.
>
> Is that still the plan? What's going on?

Now the arm64 (and other arch) port is reverted from bpf-next.
I'll send those to you soon.
Since bpf-next is focusing on x86 at first, I chose this for review in
this version. Sorry for confusion.

>
> > The fprobe itself is for providing the function entry/exit probe
> > with multiple probe point. The rethook is a sub-feature to hook the
> > function return as same as kretprobe does. Eventually, I would like
> > to replace the kretprobe's trampoline with this rethook.
>
> Can we please start by converting each architecture to rethook?

Yes. As Peter pointed, I'm planning to add a kretprobe patches to use
rethook if available in that series. let me prepare it.

>
> Ideally we'd unify things such that each architecture only needs *one*
> return trampoline that both ftrace and krpboes can use, which'd be
> significantly easier to get right and manage.

Agreed :-)

Thank you,

>
> Thanks,
> Mark.

--
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>