linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@fb.com>
Cc: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>,
	rostedt@goodmis.org, mingo@redhat.com, davem@davemloft.net,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	daniel@iogearbox.net, kernel-team@fb.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] perf: Add new type PERF_TYPE_PROBE
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2017 08:58:50 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171127075850.atthbazr4oywwoc6@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <11e688f0-c1bc-8925-225a-5b8e795336c7@fb.com>

On Sat, Nov 25, 2017 at 05:59:54PM -0800, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:

> If we were poking into 'struct perf_event_attr __user *uptr'
> directly like get|put_user(.., &uptr->config)
> then 32-bit user space with 4-byte aligned u64s would cause
> 64-bit kernel to trap on archs like sparc.

But surely archs that have hardware alignment requirements have __u64 ==
__aligned_u64 ?

It's just that the structure layout can change between archs that have
__u64 != __aligned_u64 and __u64 == __aligned_u64.

But I would argue an architecture that has hardware alignment
requirements and has an unaligned __u64 is just plain broken.

> But in this case you're right. We can use config[12] as-is, since these
> u64 fields are passing the value one way only (into the kernel) and
> we do full perf_copy_attr() first and all further accesses are from
> copied structure and u64_to_user_ptr(event->attr.config) will be fine.

Right. Also note that there are no holes in perf_event_attr, if the
structure itself is allocated aligned the individual fields will be
aligned.

> Do you mind we do
> union {
>  __u64 file_path;
>  __u64 func_name;
>  __u64 config;
> };
> and similar with config1 ?

> Or prefer that we use 'config/config1' to store string+offset there?
> I think config/config1 is cleaner than config1/config2

I would prefer you use config1/config2 for this and leave config itself
for modifiers (like the retprobe thing). It also better lines up with
the BP stuff.

A little something like so perhaps:

diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h b/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h
index 362493a2f950..b6e76512f757 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h
@@ -380,10 +380,14 @@ struct perf_event_attr {
 	__u32			bp_type;
 	union {
 		__u64		bp_addr;
+		__u64		uprobe_path;
+		__u64		kprobe_func;
 		__u64		config1; /* extension of config */
 	};
 	union {
 		__u64		bp_len;
+		__u64		kprobe_addr;
+		__u64		probe_offset;
 		__u64		config2; /* extension of config1 */
 	};
 	__u64	branch_sample_type; /* enum perf_branch_sample_type */

  reply	other threads:[~2017-11-27  7:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-11-15 17:23 [PATCH 0/6] enable creating [k,u]probe with perf_event_open Song Liu
2017-11-15 17:23 ` [PATCH] bcc: Try use new API to create " Song Liu
2017-11-15 17:23 ` [PATCH 1/6] perf: Add new type PERF_TYPE_PROBE Song Liu
2017-11-23 10:02   ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-11-24  6:31     ` Alexei Starovoitov
2017-11-24  8:28       ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-11-26  1:59         ` Alexei Starovoitov
2017-11-27  7:58           ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2017-11-23 10:22   ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-11-30  1:43     ` Song Liu
2017-11-30 13:37       ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-11-15 17:23 ` [PATCH] perf_event_open.2: add " Song Liu
2017-11-15 17:23 ` [PATCH 2/6] perf: copy new perf_event.h to tools/include/uapi Song Liu
2017-11-15 17:23 ` [PATCH 3/6] perf: implement kprobe support to PERF_TYPE_PROBE Song Liu
2017-11-23 10:06   ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-11-15 17:23 ` [PATCH 4/6] perf: implement uprobe " Song Liu
2017-11-15 17:23 ` [PATCH 5/6] bpf: add option for bpf_load.c to use PERF_TYPE_PROBE Song Liu
2017-11-15 17:23 ` [PATCH 6/6] bpf: add new test test_many_kprobe Song Liu
2017-11-22  5:00 ` [PATCH 0/6] enable creating [k,u]probe with perf_event_open Alexei Starovoitov
2017-11-23  9:02   ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-11-23  9:49     ` Peter Zijlstra

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20171127075850.atthbazr4oywwoc6@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=ast@fb.com \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=songliubraving@fb.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).