Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 7 Jan 2019 14:59:18 -0500
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To:     Andrea Righi <righi.andrea@gmail.com>
Cc:     Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, peterz@infradead.org,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] kprobes: Fix kretprobe incorrect stacking order
 problem
Message-ID: <20190107145918.407b851b@gandalf.local.home>
In-Reply-To: <20190107195209.GB5966@xps-13>
References: <154686789378.15479.2886543882215785247.stgit@devbox>
        <20190107183444.GA5966@xps-13>
        <20190107142749.34231bb6@gandalf.local.home>
        <20190107195209.GB5966@xps-13>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 20:52:09 +0100
Andrea Righi <righi.andrea@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Ug, kretprobe calls spinlocks in the callback? I wonder if we can
> > remove them.
> > 
> > I'm guessing this is a different issue than the one that this patch
> > fixes. This sounds like we are calling kretprobe from kretprobe?
> > 
> > -- Steve  
> 
> kretprobe_trampoline()
>   -> trampoline_handler()
>     -> kretprobe_hash_lock()
>       -> raw_spin_lock_irqsave()  
> 
> If we put a kretprobe to raw_spin_lock_irqsave() it looks like
> kretprobe is going to call kretprobe...

Right, but we should be able to add some recursion protection to stop
that. I have similar protection in the ftrace code.

-- Steve