On Mon, 23 Apr 2018 14:08:02 -0600 Alexei Starovoitov <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 04:08:36PM +0200, Sebastiano Miano wrote: > > > > That's in fact the real use case for the first two patches. Since bpf > > tracepoints are still a rather common (and easy to use) troubleshooting and > > monitoring tool why shouldn't we "enhance" their support with the newly > > added map/prog IDs? > > because these tracepoints can be abused in the way that this patch > demonstrated. > Whether to keep this patch in the series or not is irrelevant. I don't understand your abuse use-case, can you explain what you mean? You do realize that these tracepoints can _only_ monitor the userspace map activity (not kernel map changes) ... and we _do_ need a way to debug this (and without the map_id I can tell which map). -- Best regards, Jesper Dangaard Brouer MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer
