On Mon, May 19, 2025 at 12:27:35PM +0200, Nam Cao wrote:
> Add page fault trace points, which are useful to implement RV monitor which
> watches page faults.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Nam Cao <[email protected]>
> ---
> Cc: Catalin Marinas <[email protected]>
> Cc: Will Deacon <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
> ---
>  arch/arm64/mm/fault.c | 8 ++++++++
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c b/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c
> index ec0a337891dd..d917556869f9 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c
> @@ -44,6 +44,9 @@
>  #include <asm/tlbflush.h>
>  #include <asm/traps.h>
>  
> +#define CREATE_TRACE_POINTS
> +#include <trace/events/exceptions.h>
> +
>  struct fault_info {
>       int     (*fn)(unsigned long far, unsigned long esr,
>                     struct pt_regs *regs);
> @@ -556,6 +559,11 @@ static int __kprobes do_page_fault(unsigned long far, 
> unsigned long esr,
>       int si_code;
>       int pkey = -1;
>  
> +     if (user_mode(regs))
> +             trace_page_fault_user(addr, regs, esr);
> +     else
> +             trace_page_fault_kernel(addr, regs, esr);
> +
>       if (kprobe_page_fault(regs, esr))
>               return 0;

As per the discussion with Steve on v6, I still object to relying on the
arch code to call all these different trace helpers (rv, kprobes, perf)
in the right place and consistently with each other.

In:

https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]

Steve suggested wrapping some of this up in a core function to help with
that.

Will

Reply via email to