Re: [PATCHv2 bpf 3/3] bpf: Force cookies array to follow symbols sorting

[Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@gmail.com>]

On Wed, Jun 08, 2022 at 08:40:23AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Jun 2022 11:57:48 +0200
> Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Steven,
> > is there a reason to show '__ftrace_invalid_address___*' symbols in
> > available_filter_functions? it seems more like debug message to me
> > 
> 
> Yes, because set_ftrace_filter may be set by index. That is, if schedule is
> the 43,245th entry in available_filter_functions, then you can do:
> 
>   # echo 43245 > set_ftrace_filter
>   # cat set_ftrace_filter
>   schedule
> 
> That index must match the array index of the entries in the function list
> internally. The reason for this is that entering a name is an O(n)
> operation, where n is the number of functions in
> available_filter_functions. If you want to enable half of those functions,
> then it takes O(n^2) to do so.
> 
> I first implemented this trick to help with bisecting bad functions. That
> is, every so often a function that should be annotated with notrace, isn't
> and if it gets traced it cause the machine to reboot. To bisect this, I
> would enable half the functions at a time and enable tracing to see if it
> reboots or not, and if it does, I know that one of the half I enabled is
> the culprit, if not, it's in the other half. It would take over 5 minutes
> to enable half the functions. Where as the number trick took one second,
> not only was it O(1) per function, but it did not need to do kallsym
> lookups either. It simply enabled the function at the index.
> 
> Later, libtracefs (used by trace-cmd and others) would allow regex(3)
> enabling of functions. That is, it would search available_filter_functions
> in user space, match them via normal regex, create an index of the
> functions to know where they are, and then write in those numbers to enable
> them. It's much faster than writing in strings.
> 
> My original fix was to simply ignore those functions, but then it would
> make the index no longer match what got set. I noticed this while writing
> my slides for Kernel Recipes, and then fixed it.
> 
> The commit you mention above even states this:
> 
>       __ftrace_invalid_address___<invalid-offset>
>     
>     (showing the offset that caused it to be invalid).
>     
>     This is required for tools that use libtracefs (like trace-cmd does) that
>     scan the available_filter_functions and enable set_ftrace_filter and
>     set_ftrace_notrace using indexes of the function listed in the file (this
>     is a speedup, as enabling thousands of files via names is an O(n^2)
>     operation and can take minutes to complete, where the indexing takes less
>     than a second).
> 
> In other words, having a placeholder is required to keep from breaking user
> space.

ok, we'll have to workaround that then

thanks,
jirka