From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FA12C433F5 for ; Wed, 23 Mar 2022 14:55:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S244919AbiCWO5V (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Mar 2022 10:57:21 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:57018 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234970AbiCWO5S (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Mar 2022 10:57:18 -0400 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:4641:c500::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 932747DE21; Wed, 23 Mar 2022 07:55:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 893FB61710; Wed, 23 Mar 2022 14:55:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B1B89C340E8; Wed, 23 Mar 2022 14:55:41 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1648047347; bh=cHeg4XtXSKgVyvX8tOP4tySGT9vRJ7ndAZJt2ckl/9s=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=dcYTchivxGaG6WxPPEba8PM2zS7O0KO2EdTM617uO2m3o8q5R7irBhAzrnirHy282 eHEmQa5/xfeqTSMf9I4JTs/7ShcSfgTK515bn3KrpHY4tfpIpKnGwNxySG4WF3bOW8 FBjNZ7zxGipf0SNk05gxu1V3EBoYyh2huO+Sh7gbHRMV0LYxHYVhgak9jQZO8PbkrG NvAUbqsDCwnCb2JYg6KFSdBTvQLs2eNBO7od2DRtSc4SpR4e5ZXd2p2gwn8bAZWBLL ArSh/2uU9eNNSfBWCOm/wf42D/+mTIl71JA+hF0C8Fg5kuqBH6ndYfJOXlhsY6dqZQ SCPd+W/uZFuGg== Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2022 23:55:39 +0900 From: Masami Hiramatsu To: Mark Rutland Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Dave Hansen , x86@kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra , Jiri Olsa , Alexei Starovoitov , Andrii Nakryiko , Daniel Borkmann , Andrii Nakryiko , netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org, lkml , Martin KaFai Lau , Song Liu , Yonghong Song , John Fastabend , KP Singh , Steven Rostedt , "Naveen N . Rao" , Anil S Keshavamurthy , "David S . Miller" , catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 bpf-next 0/1] fprobe: Introduce fprobe function entry/exit probe Message-Id: <20220323235539.644ad8ace98347467de3e897@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: References: <164800288611.1716332.7053663723617614668.stgit@devnote2> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 14:18:40 +0000 Mark Rutland wrote: > On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 11:34:46AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > Hi, > > Hi Masami, > > > Here is the 13th version of rethook x86 port. This is developed for a part > > of fprobe series [1] for hooking function return. But since I forgot to send > > it to arch maintainers, that caused conflict with IBT and SLS mitigation series. > > Now I picked the x86 rethook part and send it to x86 maintainers to be > > reviewed. > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/164735281449.1084943.12438881786173547153.stgit@devnote2/T/#u > > As mentioned elsewhere, I have similar (though not identical) concerns > to Peter for the arm64 patch, which was equally unreviewed by > maintainers, and the overall structure. Yes, those should be reviewed by arch maintainers. > > > Note that this patch is still for the bpf-next since the rethook itself > > is on the bpf-next tree. But since this also uses the ANNOTATE_NOENDBR > > macro which has been introduced by IBT/ENDBR patch, to build this series > > you need to merge the tip/master branch with the bpf-next. > > (hopefully, it is rebased soon) > > I thought we were going to drop the series from the bpf-next tree so > that this could all go through review it had missed thusfar. > > Is that still the plan? What's going on? Now the arm64 (and other arch) port is reverted from bpf-next. I'll send those to you soon. Since bpf-next is focusing on x86 at first, I chose this for review in this version. Sorry for confusion. > > > The fprobe itself is for providing the function entry/exit probe > > with multiple probe point. The rethook is a sub-feature to hook the > > function return as same as kretprobe does. Eventually, I would like > > to replace the kretprobe's trampoline with this rethook. > > Can we please start by converting each architecture to rethook? Yes. As Peter pointed, I'm planning to add a kretprobe patches to use rethook if available in that series. let me prepare it. > > Ideally we'd unify things such that each architecture only needs *one* > return trampoline that both ftrace and krpboes can use, which'd be > significantly easier to get right and manage. Agreed :-) Thank you, > > Thanks, > Mark. -- Masami Hiramatsu