Re: [lttng-dev] Capturing User-Level Function Calls/Returns

[ahmadkhorrami <ahmadkhorrami@ut.ac.ir>]

Hi Michel,

Thanks for the detailed answer! DBI tools are really interesting but I 
want to do this during normal execution and on multiple programs running 
simultaneously. I mean this is not supposed to be conventional tracing 
with multiple re-executions. I want to extract some information about 
the execution-state at runtime and inform the lower levels in the 
software stack to make smarter choices. Fortunately, there are only a 
few functions that need to be traced. But any reduction in the wasted 
cycles is helpful, specially if it is caused by privilege level 
transitions.

Regards.


On 2020-07-16 05:36, Michel Dagenais wrote:

>> Without recompiling, how would that be implemented?
> 
> As you mentioned, this is possible when "jump patching" 5 bytes 
> instructions. Fast tracepoints in GDB and in kprobe do it. Kprobe goes 
> further and patches sequences of instructions (because the target 
> instruction is less than 5 bytes) if there is no incoming branch into 
> the middle of the sequence. You can go even further, for instance using 
> 3 bytes jumps to a trampoline installed in alignment nops. If you 
> combine different strategies like this, you can eventually reach almost 
> 100% success rate for "jump patching" tracepoints. This gets quite 
> hairy though. However, the short story is that there is currently no 
> tool as far as I know that does that easily and reliably in user space.
> 
> https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/spe.2746
> https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3062341.3062344
> 
> If you can afford a more invasive tool, that requires a lot of memory 
> and stops your application for quite some time, you can look at 
> approaches like dyninst that decompile the binary, insert 
> instrumentation code and reassemble the code.
> 
> https://dyninst.org/
> 
>> You would need to insert a jump on top of code, and still be able to
>> preserve that code. What a trap does, is to insert a int3, that will
>> trap into the kernel, it would then emulate the code that the int3 was
>> on, and also call some code that can trace the current state.
>> 
>> To do it in user land, you would need to find way to replace the code
>> at the location you want to trace, with a jump to the tracing
>> infrastructure, that will also be able to emulate the code that the
>> jump was inserted on top of. As on x86, that jump will need to be 5
>> bytes long (covering 5 bytes of text to emulate), where as a int3 is a
>> single byte.
>> 
>> Thus, you either recompile and insert nops where you want to place 
>> your
>> jumps, or you trap using int3 that can do the work from within the
>> kernel.
>> 
>> -- Steve
>> _______________________________________________
>> lttng-dev mailing list
>> lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org
>> https://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev