public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
To: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Michael Jeanson <mjeanson@efficios.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>, Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>,
	"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
	bpf@vger.kernel.org, Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
	Jordan Rife <jrife@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 2/3] tracing: Introduce tracepoint_is_syscall()
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2024 09:36:43 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <459b9e7d-be9b-41d8-8ae3-4aa707def641@efficios.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEf4BzbeE6n7E6K8_dhZ26ZHoVsz8V9mUSxm3CYzz2npmdpbiQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 2024-10-27 21:23, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 27, 2024 at 7:19 AM Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org> wrote:

[...]

>>>>   include/linux/tracepoint-defs.h |  2 ++
>>>>   include/linux/tracepoint.h      | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>   include/trace/define_trace.h    |  2 +-
>>>>   3 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/tracepoint-defs.h b/include/linux/tracepoint-defs.h
>>>> index 967c08d9da84..53119e074c87 100644
>>>> --- a/include/linux/tracepoint-defs.h
>>>> +++ b/include/linux/tracepoint-defs.h
>>>> @@ -32,6 +32,8 @@ struct tracepoint_func {
>>>>   struct tracepoint_ext {
>>>>      int (*regfunc)(void);
>>>>      void (*unregfunc)(void);
>>>> +   /* Flags. */
>>>> +   unsigned int syscall:1;
>>>
>>> I wonder if we should call it "sleepable" instead? For this patch set
>>> do we really care if it's a system call or not? It's really if the
>>> tracepoint is sleepable or not that's the issue. System calls are just
>>> one user of it, there may be more in the future, and the changes to BPF
>>> will still be needed.
>>
>> I agree with this. Even if currently we restrict only syscall events
>> can be sleep, "tracepoint_is_syscall()" requires to add comment to
>> explain why on all call sites e.g.
>>
> 
> +1 to naming this "sleepable" (or at least "faultable"). BPF world
> uses "sleepable BPF" terminology for BPF programs and attachment hooks
> that can take page fault (and wait/sleep waiting for those to be
> handled), so this would be consistent with that. Also, from BPF
> standpoint this will be advertised as attaching to sleepable
> tracepoints regardless, so "syscall" terminology is too specific and
> misleading, because while current set of tracepoints are
> syscall-specific, the important part is taking page fault, no tracing
> syscalls.

+1 for "faultable".

Thanks,

Mathieu

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
https://www.efficios.com


  reply	other threads:[~2024-10-28 13:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-10-26 15:46 [RFC PATCH v3 1/3] tracing: Introduce tracepoint extended structure Mathieu Desnoyers
2024-10-26 15:46 ` [RFC PATCH v3 2/3] tracing: Introduce tracepoint_is_syscall() Mathieu Desnoyers
2024-10-27  0:08   ` Steven Rostedt
2024-10-27 12:30     ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2024-10-28  5:06       ` Steven Rostedt
2024-10-28 13:35         ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2024-10-27 14:19     ` Masami Hiramatsu
2024-10-28  1:23       ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-10-28 13:36         ` Mathieu Desnoyers [this message]
2024-10-26 15:46 ` [RFC PATCH v3 3/3] tracing: Fix syscall tracepoint use-after-free Mathieu Desnoyers
2024-10-28  1:22   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-10-28 19:19     ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2024-10-31 15:43       ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2024-10-31 16:35         ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-10-28  1:22 ` [RFC PATCH v3 1/3] tracing: Introduce tracepoint extended structure Andrii Nakryiko
2024-10-28 19:13   ` 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=459b9e7d-be9b-41d8-8ae3-4aa707def641@efficios.com \
    --to=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
    --cc=jrife@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=mjeanson@efficios.com \
    --cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=yhs@fb.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