Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 11:40:24 +0530
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@in.ibm.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com>,
       Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, Steven@e28smtp08.in.ibm.com,
       utrace-devel@redhat.com, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
       Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
       Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
       Jim Keniston <jkenisto@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] utrace-based ftrace "process" engine, v2
Message-ID: <20090324061024.GD24018@in.ibm.com>
Reply-To: ananth@in.ibm.com
References: <20090321013946.890F4FC3AB@magilla.sf.frob.com> <20090321014244.9ADF1FC3AB@magilla.sf.frob.com> <20090321074301.GA19384@elte.hu> <20090321013912.ed6039c9.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20090321091235.GA29678@elte.hu> <20090321041954.72b99e69.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20090321115141.GA3566@redhat.com> <20090321050422.d1d99eec.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20090324052926.GC24018@in.ibm.com> <20090323225409.07bdcbf7.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20090323225409.07bdcbf7.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2590
Lines: 55

On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 10:54:09PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 10:59:26 +0530 Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@in.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 05:04:22AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 07:51:41 -0400 "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 04:19:54AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > 
> > > I have strong memories of being traumatised by reading the uprobes code. 
> > 
> > That was a long time ago wasn't it? :-)
> > 
> > That approach was a carry over from an implementation from dprobes that
> > used readdir hooks. Yes, that was not the most elegant approach, as such
> > has long been shelved.
> > 
> > > What's the story on all of that nowadays?
> > 
> > Utrace makes implementing uprobes more cleaner. We have a prototype that
> > implements uprobes over utrace. Its per process, doesn't use any
> > in-kernel hooks, etc. It currently has a kprobes like interface (needs a
> > kernel module), but it shouldn't be difficult to adapt it to use
> > utrace's user interfaces (syscalls?) when those come around. The current
> > generation of uprobes that has all the bells and whistles can be found at
> > http://sources.redhat.com/git/gitweb.cgi?p=systemtap.git;a=tree;f=runtime/uprobes2
> > 
> > However, there are aspects of the current uprobes that can be useful to
> > any other userspace tracer: instruction analysis, breakpoint insertion
> > and removal, single-stepping support. With these layered on top of
> > utrace, building userspace debug/trace tools that depend on utrace
> > should be easier, outside of ptrace.
> > 
> > Work is currently on to factor these layers out. The intention is to
> > upstream all the bits required for userspace tracing once utrace gets
> > in, along with an easy to use interface for userspace developers
> > (a /proc or /debugfs interface?) -- one should be able to use it on
> > its own or with SystemTap, whatever they prefer. Details are still hazy
> > at the moment.
> > 
> > But, utrace is the foundation to do all of that.
> > 
> 
> The sticking point was uprobes's modification of live pagecache.  We said
> "ick, COW the pages" and you said "too expensive".  And there things
> remained.
> 
> Is that all going to happen again?

No. All modifications are via access_process_vm().

Ananth
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/