Re: [rfc-patch 07/11] Text Edit Lock - kprobes architecture independent support
* Roel Kluin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
[...]
> > for (i = 0; i < KPROBE_TABLE_SIZE; i++) {
> > head = &kprobe_table[i];
> > + kernel_text_lock();
> > hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(p, node, head, hlist)
> > arch_arm_kprobe(p);
> > + kernel_text_unlock();
> > }
>
> isn't it better to put the kernel_text_lock around the for loop?
>
> >
> > kprobe_enabled = true;
> > @@ -969,10 +974,12 @@ static void __kprobes disable_all_kprobe
> > printk(KERN_INFO "Kprobes globally disabled\n");
> > for (i = 0; i < KPROBE_TABLE_SIZE; i++) {
> > head = &kprobe_table[i];
> > + kernel_text_lock();
> > hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(p, node, head, hlist) {
> > if (!arch_trampoline_kprobe(p))
> > arch_disarm_kprobe(p);
> > }
> > + kernel_text_unlock();
> > }
>
> same question here
>
Yes, you are right, although it does not have to be fast. Here is the
updated patch.
Text Edit Lock - kprobes architecture independent support
Use the mutual exclusion provided by the text edit lock in the kprobes code. It
allows coherent manipulation of the kernel code by other subsystems.
Changelog:
Move the kernel_text_lock/unlock out of the for loops.
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Acked-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: Roel Kluin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
kernel/kprobes.c | 19 +--
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
Index: linux-2.6-lttng/kernel/kprobes.c
===
--- linux-2.6-lttng.orig/kernel/kprobes.c 2007-11-16 13:40:06.0
-0500
+++ linux-2.6-lttng/kernel/kprobes.c2007-11-17 10:00:23.0 -0500
@@ -43,6 +43,7 @@
#include
#include
#include
+#include
#include
#include
@@ -568,9 +569,10 @@ static int __kprobes __register_kprobe(s
goto out;
}
+ kernel_text_lock();
ret = arch_prepare_kprobe(p);
if (ret)
- goto out;
+ goto out_unlock_text;
INIT_HLIST_NODE(&p->hlist);
hlist_add_head_rcu(&p->hlist,
@@ -578,7 +580,8 @@ static int __kprobes __register_kprobe(s
if (kprobe_enabled)
arch_arm_kprobe(p);
-
+out_unlock_text:
+ kernel_text_unlock();
out:
mutex_unlock(&kprobe_mutex);
@@ -621,8 +624,11 @@ valid_p:
* enabled - otherwise, the breakpoint would already have
* been removed. We save on flushing icache.
*/
- if (kprobe_enabled)
+ if (kprobe_enabled) {
+ kernel_text_lock();
arch_disarm_kprobe(p);
+ kernel_text_unlock();
+ }
hlist_del_rcu(&old_p->hlist);
cleanup_p = 1;
} else {
@@ -644,9 +650,7 @@ valid_p:
list_del_rcu(&p->list);
kfree(old_p);
}
- mutex_lock(&kprobe_mutex);
arch_remove_kprobe(p);
- mutex_unlock(&kprobe_mutex);
} else {
mutex_lock(&kprobe_mutex);
if (p->break_handler)
@@ -717,7 +721,6 @@ static int __kprobes pre_handler_kretpro
ri->rp = rp;
ri->task = current;
arch_prepare_kretprobe(ri, regs);
-
/* XXX(hch): why is there no hlist_move_head? */
hlist_del(&ri->uflist);
hlist_add_head(&ri->uflist, &ri->rp->used_instances);
@@ -938,11 +941,13 @@ static void __kprobes enable_all_kprobes
if (kprobe_enabled)
goto already_enabled;
+ kernel_text_lock();
for (i = 0; i < KPROBE_TABLE_SIZE; i++) {
head = &kprobe_table[i];
hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(p, node, head, hlist)
arch_arm_kprobe(p);
}
+ kernel_text_unlock();
kprobe_enabled = true;
printk(KERN_INFO "Kprobes globally enabled\n");
@@ -967,6 +972,7 @@ static void __kprobes disable_all_kprobe
kprobe_enabled = false;
printk(KERN_INFO "Kprobes globally disabled\n");
+ kernel_text_lock();
for (i = 0; i < KPROBE_TABLE_SIZE; i++) {
head = &kprobe_table[i];
hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(p, node, head, hlist) {
@@ -974,6 +980,7 @@ static void __kprobes disable_all_kprobe
arch_disarm_kprobe(p);
}
}
+ kernel_text_unlock();
mutex_unlock(&kprobe_mutex);
/* Allow all currently running kprobes to complete */
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Computer Engineering Ph.D. Student, Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E
Re: [rfc-patch 07/11] Text Edit Lock - kprobes architecture independent support
Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> Use the mutual exclusion provided by the text edit lock in the kprobes code.
> It
> allows coherent manipulation of the kernel code by other subsystems.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Acked-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ---
> kernel/kprobes.c | 19 +--
> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> Index: linux-2.6-lttng/kernel/kprobes.c
> ===
> --- linux-2.6-lttng.orig/kernel/kprobes.c 2007-09-07 10:12:06.0
> -0400
> +++ linux-2.6-lttng/kernel/kprobes.c 2007-09-07 10:13:09.0 -0400
> @@ -43,6 +43,7 @@
> #include
> #include
> #include
> +#include
>
> #include
> #include
> @@ -568,9 +569,10 @@ static int __kprobes __register_kprobe(s
> goto out;
> }
>
> + kernel_text_lock();
> ret = arch_prepare_kprobe(p);
> if (ret)
> - goto out;
> + goto out_unlock_text;
>
> INIT_HLIST_NODE(&p->hlist);
> hlist_add_head_rcu(&p->hlist,
> @@ -578,7 +580,8 @@ static int __kprobes __register_kprobe(s
>
> if (kprobe_enabled)
> arch_arm_kprobe(p);
> -
> +out_unlock_text:
> + kernel_text_unlock();
> out:
> mutex_unlock(&kprobe_mutex);
>
> @@ -621,8 +624,11 @@ valid_p:
>* enabled - otherwise, the breakpoint would already have
>* been removed. We save on flushing icache.
>*/
> - if (kprobe_enabled)
> + if (kprobe_enabled) {
> + kernel_text_lock();
> arch_disarm_kprobe(p);
> + kernel_text_unlock();
> + }
> hlist_del_rcu(&old_p->hlist);
> cleanup_p = 1;
> } else {
> @@ -644,9 +650,7 @@ valid_p:
> list_del_rcu(&p->list);
> kfree(old_p);
> }
> - mutex_lock(&kprobe_mutex);
> arch_remove_kprobe(p);
> - mutex_unlock(&kprobe_mutex);
> } else {
> mutex_lock(&kprobe_mutex);
> if (p->break_handler)
> @@ -717,7 +721,6 @@ static int __kprobes pre_handler_kretpro
> ri->rp = rp;
> ri->task = current;
> arch_prepare_kretprobe(ri, regs);
> -
> /* XXX(hch): why is there no hlist_move_head? */
> hlist_del(&ri->uflist);
> hlist_add_head(&ri->uflist, &ri->rp->used_instances);
> @@ -940,8 +943,10 @@ static void __kprobes enable_all_kprobes
>
> for (i = 0; i < KPROBE_TABLE_SIZE; i++) {
> head = &kprobe_table[i];
> + kernel_text_lock();
> hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(p, node, head, hlist)
> arch_arm_kprobe(p);
> + kernel_text_unlock();
> }
isn't it better to put the kernel_text_lock around the for loop?
>
> kprobe_enabled = true;
> @@ -969,10 +974,12 @@ static void __kprobes disable_all_kprobe
> printk(KERN_INFO "Kprobes globally disabled\n");
> for (i = 0; i < KPROBE_TABLE_SIZE; i++) {
> head = &kprobe_table[i];
> + kernel_text_lock();
> hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(p, node, head, hlist) {
> if (!arch_trampoline_kprobe(p))
> arch_disarm_kprobe(p);
> }
> + kernel_text_unlock();
> }
same question here
>
> mutex_unlock(&kprobe_mutex);
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[rfc-patch 07/11] Text Edit Lock - kprobes architecture independent support
Use the mutual exclusion provided by the text edit lock in the kprobes code. It
allows coherent manipulation of the kernel code by other subsystems.
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Acked-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
kernel/kprobes.c | 19 +--
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
Index: linux-2.6-lttng/kernel/kprobes.c
===
--- linux-2.6-lttng.orig/kernel/kprobes.c 2007-09-07 10:12:06.0
-0400
+++ linux-2.6-lttng/kernel/kprobes.c2007-09-07 10:13:09.0 -0400
@@ -43,6 +43,7 @@
#include
#include
#include
+#include
#include
#include
@@ -568,9 +569,10 @@ static int __kprobes __register_kprobe(s
goto out;
}
+ kernel_text_lock();
ret = arch_prepare_kprobe(p);
if (ret)
- goto out;
+ goto out_unlock_text;
INIT_HLIST_NODE(&p->hlist);
hlist_add_head_rcu(&p->hlist,
@@ -578,7 +580,8 @@ static int __kprobes __register_kprobe(s
if (kprobe_enabled)
arch_arm_kprobe(p);
-
+out_unlock_text:
+ kernel_text_unlock();
out:
mutex_unlock(&kprobe_mutex);
@@ -621,8 +624,11 @@ valid_p:
* enabled - otherwise, the breakpoint would already have
* been removed. We save on flushing icache.
*/
- if (kprobe_enabled)
+ if (kprobe_enabled) {
+ kernel_text_lock();
arch_disarm_kprobe(p);
+ kernel_text_unlock();
+ }
hlist_del_rcu(&old_p->hlist);
cleanup_p = 1;
} else {
@@ -644,9 +650,7 @@ valid_p:
list_del_rcu(&p->list);
kfree(old_p);
}
- mutex_lock(&kprobe_mutex);
arch_remove_kprobe(p);
- mutex_unlock(&kprobe_mutex);
} else {
mutex_lock(&kprobe_mutex);
if (p->break_handler)
@@ -717,7 +721,6 @@ static int __kprobes pre_handler_kretpro
ri->rp = rp;
ri->task = current;
arch_prepare_kretprobe(ri, regs);
-
/* XXX(hch): why is there no hlist_move_head? */
hlist_del(&ri->uflist);
hlist_add_head(&ri->uflist, &ri->rp->used_instances);
@@ -940,8 +943,10 @@ static void __kprobes enable_all_kprobes
for (i = 0; i < KPROBE_TABLE_SIZE; i++) {
head = &kprobe_table[i];
+ kernel_text_lock();
hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(p, node, head, hlist)
arch_arm_kprobe(p);
+ kernel_text_unlock();
}
kprobe_enabled = true;
@@ -969,10 +974,12 @@ static void __kprobes disable_all_kprobe
printk(KERN_INFO "Kprobes globally disabled\n");
for (i = 0; i < KPROBE_TABLE_SIZE; i++) {
head = &kprobe_table[i];
+ kernel_text_lock();
hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(p, node, head, hlist) {
if (!arch_trampoline_kprobe(p))
arch_disarm_kprobe(p);
}
+ kernel_text_unlock();
}
mutex_unlock(&kprobe_mutex);
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Computer Engineering Ph.D. Student, Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
