Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Fri, 21 Apr 2023 08:41:06 +0900
From:   Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>
To:     Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Cc:     linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Florent Revest <revest@chromium.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>, bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/9] tracing/probes: Add fprobe events for tracing
 function entry and exit.
Message-Id: <20230421084106.5a02844971e18cdd8ad163be@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20230420184932.pgv5wiqqt4fzswdk@MacBook-Pro-6.local>
References: <168198993129.1795549.8306571027057356176.stgit@mhiramat.roam.corp.google.com>
        <168198995084.1795549.16754963116067902376.stgit@mhiramat.roam.corp.google.com>
        <20230420184932.pgv5wiqqt4fzswdk@MacBook-Pro-6.local>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 20 Apr 2023 11:49:32 -0700
Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 20, 2023 at 08:25:50PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu (Google) wrote:
> > +static int fentry_perf_func(struct trace_fprobe *tf, unsigned long entry_ip,
> > +			    struct pt_regs *regs)
> > +{
> > +	struct trace_event_call *call = trace_probe_event_call(&tf->tp);
> > +	struct fentry_trace_entry_head *entry;
> > +	struct hlist_head *head;
> > +	int size, __size, dsize;
> > +	int rctx;
> > +
> > +	if (bpf_prog_array_valid(call)) {
> > +		unsigned long orig_ip = instruction_pointer(regs);
> > +		int ret;
> > +
> > +		ret = trace_call_bpf(call, regs);
> 
> Please do not call bpf from fprobe.
> There is no use case for it.

OK.

> 
> > +
> > +		/*
> > +		 * We need to check and see if we modified the pc of the
> > +		 * pt_regs, and if so return 1 so that we don't do the
> > +		 * single stepping.
> > +		 */
> > +		if (orig_ip != instruction_pointer(regs))
> > +			return 1;
> > +		if (!ret)
> > +			return 0;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	head = this_cpu_ptr(call->perf_events);
> > +	if (hlist_empty(head))
> > +		return 0;
> > +
> > +	dsize = __get_data_size(&tf->tp, regs);
> > +	__size = sizeof(*entry) + tf->tp.size + dsize;
> > +	size = ALIGN(__size + sizeof(u32), sizeof(u64));
> > +	size -= sizeof(u32);
> > +
> > +	entry = perf_trace_buf_alloc(size, NULL, &rctx);
> > +	if (!entry)
> > +		return 0;
> > +
> > +	entry->ip = entry_ip;
> > +	memset(&entry[1], 0, dsize);
> > +	store_trace_args(&entry[1], &tf->tp, regs, sizeof(*entry), dsize);
> > +	perf_trace_buf_submit(entry, size, rctx, call->event.type, 1, regs,
> > +			      head, NULL);
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> > +NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(fentry_perf_func);
> > +
> > +static void
> > +fexit_perf_func(struct trace_fprobe *tf, unsigned long entry_ip,
> > +		unsigned long ret_ip, struct pt_regs *regs)
> > +{
> > +	struct trace_event_call *call = trace_probe_event_call(&tf->tp);
> > +	struct fexit_trace_entry_head *entry;
> > +	struct hlist_head *head;
> > +	int size, __size, dsize;
> > +	int rctx;
> > +
> > +	if (bpf_prog_array_valid(call) && !trace_call_bpf(call, regs))
> > +		return;
> 
> Same here.
> These two parts look like copy-paste from kprobes.
> I suspect this code wasn't tested at all.

OK, I missed to test that bpf part. I thought bpf could be appended to
any "trace-event" (looks like trace-event), isn't it?

Thank you,

-- 
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>