From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"zhangwei(Jovi)" <jovi.zhangwei@huawei.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] uprobes: Use synchronize_rcu() not synchronize_sched()
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2018 15:36:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180810133608.GC3677@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180810084832.70b9a62a@gandalf.local.home>
On 08/10, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2018 13:35:49 +0200
> Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > On 08/09, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > >
> > > --- a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
> > > @@ -952,7 +952,7 @@ probe_event_disable(struct trace_uprobe *tu, struct trace_event_file *file)
> > >
> > > list_del_rcu(&link->list);
> > > /* synchronize with u{,ret}probe_trace_func */
> > > - synchronize_sched();
> > > + synchronize_rcu();
> >
> > Can't we change uprobe_trace_func() and uretprobe_trace_func() to use
> > rcu_read_lock_sched() instead? It is more cheap.
>
> Is it? rcu_read_lock_sched() is a preempt_disable(),
which is just raw_cpu_inc()
> where
> rcu_read_lock() may just be a task counter increment.
and __rcu_read_unlock() is more heavy.
OK, I agree, this doesn't really matter.
> > Hmm. probe_event_enable() does list_del + kfree on failure, this doesn't
> > look right... Not only because kfree() can race with list_for_each_entry_rcu(),
> > we should not put the 1st link on list until uprobe_buffer_enable().
> >
> > Does the patch below make sense or I am confused?
>
> I guess the question is, if it isn't enabled, are there any users or
> even past users still running.
Note that uprobe_register() is not "atomic".
To simplify, suppose we have 2 tasks T1 and T2 running the probed binary.
So we are going to do install_breakpoint(T1->mm) + install_breakpoint(T2->mm).
If the 2nd install_breakpoint() fails for any reason, _register() will do
remove_breakpoint(T1->mm) and return the error.
However, T1 can hit this bp right after install_breakpoint(T1->mm), so it
can call uprobe_trace_func() before list_del(&link->list).
OK, even if I am right this is mostly theoretical.
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-10 13:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-09 20:05 [PATCH] uprobes: Use synchronize_rcu() not synchronize_sched() Steven Rostedt
2018-08-10 11:35 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-08-10 11:42 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-08-10 12:48 ` Steven Rostedt
2018-08-10 13:36 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2018-08-10 13:44 ` Steven Rostedt
2018-08-10 14:06 ` Oleg Nesterov
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=20180810133608.GC3677@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jovi.zhangwei@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/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).