* Oleg Nesterov <o...@redhat.com> [2013-02-04 20:02:58]:
> Finally implement uprobe_perf_filter() which checks ->nr_systemwide or
> ->perf_events to figure out whether we need to insert the breakpoint.
>
> uprobe_perf_open/close are changed to do uprobe_apply(true/false) when
> the new perf event comes or goes away.
>
> Note that currently this is very suboptimal:
>
> - uprobe_register() called by TRACE_REG_PERF_REGISTER becomes a
> heavy nop, consumer->filter() always returns F at this stage.
>
> As it was already discussed we need uprobe_register_only() to
> avoid the costly register_for_each_vma() when possible.
>
> - uprobe_apply() is oftenly overkill. Unless "nr_systemwide != 0"
> changes we need uprobe_apply_mm(), unapply_uprobe() is almost
> what we need.
>
> - uprobe_apply() can be simply avoided sometimes, see the next
> changes.
>
> Testing:
>
> # perf probe -x /lib/libc.so.6 syscall
>
> # perl -e 'syscall -1 while 1' &
> [1] 530
>
> # perf record -e probe_libc:syscall perl -e 'syscall -1 for 1..10;
> sleep 1'
>
> # perf report --show-total-period
> 100.00% 10 perl libc-2.8.so [.] syscall
>
> Before this patch:
>
> # cat /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/uprobe_profile
> /lib/libc.so.6 syscall 79291
>
> A huge ->nrhit == 79291 reflects the fact that the background process
> 530 constantly hits this breakpoint too, even if doesn't contribute to
> the output.
>
> After the patch:
>
> # cat /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/uprobe_profile
> /lib/libc.so.6 syscall 10
>
> This shows that only the target process was punished by int3.
>
> Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <o...@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju <sri...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
> kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> 1 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
> index f05ec32..5d5a261 100644
> --- a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
> @@ -554,7 +554,12 @@ static inline bool is_trace_uprobe_enabled(struct
> trace_uprobe *tu)
> return tu->flags & (TP_FLAG_TRACE | TP_FLAG_PROFILE);
> }
>
> -static int probe_event_enable(struct trace_uprobe *tu, int flag)
> +typedef bool (*filter_func_t)(struct uprobe_consumer *self,
> + enum uprobe_filter_ctx ctx,
> + struct mm_struct *mm);
> +
> +static int
> +probe_event_enable(struct trace_uprobe *tu, int flag, filter_func_t filter)
> {
> int ret = 0;
>
> @@ -564,6 +569,7 @@ static int probe_event_enable(struct trace_uprobe *tu,
> int flag)
> WARN_ON(!uprobe_filter_is_empty(&tu->filter));
>
> tu->flags |= flag;
> + tu->consumer.filter = filter;
> ret = uprobe_register(tu->inode, tu->offset, &tu->consumer);
> if (ret)
> tu->flags &= ~flag;
> @@ -653,6 +659,22 @@ static int set_print_fmt(struct trace_uprobe *tu)
> }
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS
> +static bool
> +__uprobe_perf_filter(struct trace_uprobe_filter *filter, struct mm_struct
> *mm)
> +{
> + struct perf_event *event;
> +
> + if (filter->nr_systemwide)
> + return true;
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(event, &filter->perf_events, hw.tp_list) {
> + if (event->hw.tp_target->mm == mm)
> + return true;
> + }
> +
> + return false;
> +}
> +
> static int uprobe_perf_open(struct trace_uprobe *tu, struct perf_event
> *event)
> {
> write_lock(&tu->filter.rwlock);
> @@ -662,6 +684,8 @@ static int uprobe_perf_open(struct trace_uprobe *tu,
> struct perf_event *event)
> tu->filter.nr_systemwide++;
> write_unlock(&tu->filter.rwlock);
>
> + uprobe_apply(tu->inode, tu->offset, &tu->consumer, true);
> +
> return 0;
> }
>
> @@ -674,9 +698,25 @@ static int uprobe_perf_close(struct trace_uprobe *tu,
> struct perf_event *event)
> tu->filter.nr_systemwide--;
> write_unlock(&tu->filter.rwlock);
>
> + uprobe_apply(tu->inode, tu->offset, &tu->consumer, false);
> +
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static bool uprobe_perf_filter(struct uprobe_consumer *uc,
> + enum uprobe_filter_ctx ctx, struct mm_struct
> *mm)
> +{
> + struct trace_uprobe *tu;
> + int ret;
> +
> + tu = container_of(uc, struct trace_uprobe, consumer);
> + read_lock(&tu->filter.rwlock);
> + ret = __uprobe_perf_filter(&tu->filter, mm);
> + read_unlock(&tu->filter.rwlock);
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> /* uprobe profile handler */
> static void uprobe_perf_func(struct trace_uprobe *tu, struct pt_regs *regs)
> {
> @@ -719,7 +759,7 @@ int trace_uprobe_register(struct ftrace_event_call
> *event, enum trace_reg type,
>
> switch (type) {
> case TRACE_REG_REGISTER:
> - return probe_event_enable(tu, TP_FLAG_TRACE);
> + return probe_event_enable(tu, TP_FLAG_TRACE, NULL);
>
> case TRACE_REG_UNREGISTER:
> probe_event_disable(tu, TP_FLAG_TRACE);
> @@ -727,7 +767,7 @@ int trace_uprobe_register(struct ftrace_event_call
> *event, enum trace_reg type,
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS
> case TRACE_REG_PERF_REGISTER:
> - return probe_event_enable(tu, TP_FLAG_PROFILE);
> + return probe_event_enable(tu, TP_FLAG_PROFILE,
> uprobe_perf_filter);
>
> case TRACE_REG_PERF_UNREGISTER:
> probe_event_disable(tu, TP_FLAG_PROFILE);
> --
> 1.5.5.1
>
--
Thanks and Regards
Srikar Dronamraju
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
