This is the mail archive of the
systemtap@sourceware.org
mailing list for the systemtap project.
Re: [RFC] [PATCH 2.6.37-rc5-tip 10/20] 10: uprobes: task specific information.
- From: Josh Stone <jistone at redhat dot com>
- To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz at infradead dot org>
- Cc: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo at elte dot hu>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt at goodmis dot org>, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme at infradead dot org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds at linux-foundation dot org>, Masami Hiramatsu <masami dot hiramatsu dot pt at hitachi dot com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch at infradead dot org>, Andi Kleen <andi at firstfloor dot org>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg at redhat dot com>, LKML <linux-kernel at vger dot kernel dot org>, SystemTap <systemtap at sources dot redhat dot com>, Linux-mm <linux-mm at vger dot kernel dot org>, Jim Keniston <jkenisto at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>, Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec at gmail dot com>, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth at in dot ibm dot com>, Andrew Morton <akpm at linux-foundation dot org>, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>
- Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 10:38:15 -0800
- Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH 2.6.37-rc5-tip 10/20] 10: uprobes: task specific information.
- References: <20101216095714.23751.52601.sendpatchset@localhost6.localdomain6> <20101216095912.23751.63180.sendpatchset@localhost6.localdomain6> <1295963775.28776.1056.camel@laptop>
On 01/25/2011 05:56 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Ah, I think I found it while reading patch 13, you need the pre/post_xol
> callbacks, can't you simply synthesize their effect into the replacement
> sequence?
>
> push %rax
> mov $vaddr, %rax
> $INSN
> pop %rax
> jmp $next_insn
>
> like replacements would obviate the need for the pre/post callbacks and
> allow you to run straight through.
For this particular example, you'd better be sure that $INSN doesn't
need %rsp intact.
Control flow in general also makes this challenging. If $INSN is a
call, then any inline fixups won't get a chance until after return. If
$INSN is a jump, then its target must be modified so that both taken and
not-taken paths land in respective fixup locations. I'm sure there are
more cases that I'm not thinking of.
> It would also remove the whole single-step need since they're proper
> boosted probes.
Kprobes has boosting, but it doesn't apply to all opcodes. I would
guess that the same could be done for uprobes, where certain opcodes get
a fixup sequence like you suggest, but the pre/post_xol mechanism is
still needed in general.
Josh