On Mon, 2026-03-16 at 16:38 -0400, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2026 at 05:58:34PM -0300, Marcos Paulo de Souza
> wrote:
> > Running the upstream selftests on older kernels can presente some
> > issues
> > regarding features being not present. One of such issues if the
> > missing
> > capability of having both kprobes and livepatches on the same
> > function.
> >
>
> nit picking, but slightly reworded for clarity and spelling:
>
> Running upstream selftests on older kernels can be problematic when
> features or fixes from newer versions are not present. For example,
> older kernels may lack the capability to support kprobes and
> livepatches
> on the same function simultaneously.
Much better, I'll pick your description for v2.
>
> > The support was introduced in commit 0bc11ed5ab60c
> > ("kprobes: Allow kprobes coexist with livepatch"), which means that
> > older
> > kernels may lack this change.
> >
> > The lack of this feature can be checked when a kprobe without a
> > post_handler is loaded and checking that the enabled_function's
> > file
> > shows the flag "I". A kernel with the proper support for kprobes
> > and
> > livepatches would presente the flag only when a post_handler is
>
> nit: s/presente/present
Ok.
>
> > registered.
> >
> > No functional changes.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Marcos Paulo de Souza <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/test-kprobe.sh | 52
> > ++++++++++++++----------
> > 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/test-kprobe.sh
> > b/tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/test-kprobe.sh
> > index cdf31d0e51955..44cd16156dbd4 100755
> > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/test-kprobe.sh
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/test-kprobe.sh
> > @@ -16,30 +16,19 @@ setup_config
> > # when it uses a post_handler since only one IPMODIFY maybe be
> > registered
> > # to any given function at a time.
> >
> > -start_test "livepatch interaction with kprobed function with
> > post_handler"
> > -
> > -echo 1 > "$SYSFS_KPROBES_DIR/enabled"
> > -
> > -load_mod $MOD_KPROBE has_post_handler=1
> > -load_failing_mod $MOD_LIVEPATCH
> > -unload_mod $MOD_KPROBE
> > -
> > -check_result "% insmod test_modules/test_klp_kprobe.ko
> > has_post_handler=1
> > -% insmod test_modules/$MOD_LIVEPATCH.ko
> > -livepatch: enabling patch '$MOD_LIVEPATCH'
> > -livepatch: '$MOD_LIVEPATCH': initializing patching transition
> > -livepatch: failed to register ftrace handler for function
> > 'cmdline_proc_show' (-16)
> > -livepatch: failed to patch object 'vmlinux'
> > -livepatch: failed to enable patch '$MOD_LIVEPATCH'
> > -livepatch: '$MOD_LIVEPATCH': canceling patching transition, going
> > to unpatch
> > -livepatch: '$MOD_LIVEPATCH': completing unpatching transition
> > -livepatch: '$MOD_LIVEPATCH': unpatching complete
> > -insmod: ERROR: could not insert module
> > test_modules/$MOD_LIVEPATCH.ko: Device or resource busy
> > -% rmmod test_klp_kprobe"
> > -
> > start_test "livepatch interaction with kprobed function without
> > post_handler"
> >
> > load_mod $MOD_KPROBE has_post_handler=0
> > +
> > +# Check if commit 0bc11ed5ab60c ("kprobes: Allow kprobes coexist
> > with livepatch")
> > +# is missing, meaning that livepatches and kprobes can't be used
> > together.
> > +# When the commit is missing, kprobes always set IPMODIFY (the I
> > flag), even
> > +# when the post handler is missing.
> > +if grep --quiet ") R I"
> > "$SYSFS_DEBUG_DIR/tracing/enabled_functions"; then
>
> Will flags R I always be in this order?
seq_printf(m, " (%ld)%s%s%s%s%s",
ftrace_rec_count(rec),
rec->flags & FTRACE_FL_REGS ? " R" : " ",
rec->flags & FTRACE_FL_IPMODIFY ? " I" : "
",
So this is safe. I'll add a comment in the patch to explain why this is
safe too. Thanks for the comment!
>
> --
> Joe
