Date:   Thu, 6 Jan 2022 09:41:46 +0100
From:   Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
To:     Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
Cc:     Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
        Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@chromium.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@linux.ibm.com>,
        Anil S Keshavamurthy <anil.s.keshavamurthy@intel.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/13] bpf: Add kprobe link for attaching raw kprobes
Message-ID: <YdarSovbcmoY9lI6@krava>
References: <20220104080943.113249-1-jolsa@kernel.org>
 <20220104080943.113249-9-jolsa@kernel.org>
 <CAEf4BzZ7s=Pp+2xY3qKX9u6KrPdGW9NNfoiep7nGW+=_s=JJJA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAEf4BzZ7s=Pp+2xY3qKX9u6KrPdGW9NNfoiep7nGW+=_s=JJJA@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 08:30:56PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 12:10 AM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > Adding new link type BPF_LINK_TYPE_KPROBE to attach kprobes
> > directly through register_kprobe/kretprobe API.
> >
> > Adding new attach type BPF_TRACE_RAW_KPROBE that enables
> > such link for kprobe program.
> >
> > The new link allows to create multiple kprobes link by using
> > new link_create interface:
> >
> >   struct {
> >     __aligned_u64   addrs;
> >     __u32           cnt;
> >     __u64           bpf_cookie;
> 
> I'm afraid bpf_cookie has to be different for each addr, otherwise
> it's severely limiting. So it would be an array of cookies alongside
> an array of addresses

ok

> 
> >   } kprobe;
> >
> > Plus new flag BPF_F_KPROBE_RETURN for link_create.flags to
> > create return probe.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
> > ---
> >  include/linux/bpf_types.h      |   1 +
> >  include/uapi/linux/bpf.h       |  12 +++
> >  kernel/bpf/syscall.c           | 191 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >  tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h |  12 +++
> >  4 files changed, 211 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> 
> [...]
> 
> > @@ -1111,6 +1113,11 @@ enum bpf_link_type {
> >   */
> >  #define BPF_F_SLEEPABLE                (1U << 4)
> >
> > +/* link_create flags used in LINK_CREATE command for BPF_TRACE_RAW_KPROBE
> > + * attach type.
> > + */
> > +#define BPF_F_KPROBE_RETURN    (1U << 0)
> > +
> 
> we have plenty of flexibility to have per-link type fields, so why not
> add `bool is_retprobe` next to addrs and cnt?

well I thought if I do that, people would suggest to use the empty
flags field instead ;-) 

we can move it there as you suggest, but I wonder it's good idea to
use bool in uapi headers, because the bool size definition is vague

jirka

> 
> >  /* When BPF ldimm64's insn[0].src_reg != 0 then this can have
> >   * the following extensions:
> >   *
> > @@ -1465,6 +1472,11 @@ union bpf_attr {
> >                                  */
> >                                 __u64           bpf_cookie;
> >                         } perf_event;
> > +                       struct {
> > +                               __aligned_u64   addrs;
> > +                               __u32           cnt;
> > +                               __u64           bpf_cookie;
> > +                       } kprobe;
> >                 };
> >         } link_create;
> >
> 
> [...]
>