From: peterz@infradead.org
To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
Cc: "Eddy_Wu@trendmicro.com" <Eddy_Wu@trendmicro.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: x86/kprobes: kretprobe fails to triggered if kprobe at function entry is not optimized (trigger by int3 breakpoint)
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 09:36:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200825073651.GW1362448@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200825031503.57d08355bf44900af7d70536@kernel.org>
On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 03:15:03AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > I did the below, but i'm not at all sure that isn't horrible broken. I
> > can't really find many rp->lock sites and this might break things by
> > limiting contention.
>
> This is not enough.
I was afraid of that..
> For checking the recursion of kretprobes, we might
> need kretprobe_table_trylock() or kretprobe_table_busy() (but both
> can be false positive)
Agreed.
> Note that rp->lock shouldn't matter unless we will support recursive
> kprobe itself. (even though, we can use raw_spin_trylock_irqsave())
If the deadlock mentioned isn't about rp->lock, then what it is about?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-25 7:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-08-24 12:02 Eddy_Wu
2020-08-24 14:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-08-24 16:18 ` Eddy_Wu
2020-08-24 18:15 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2020-08-25 7:36 ` peterz [this message]
2020-08-24 15:54 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2020-08-24 16:41 ` Eddy_Wu
2020-08-25 6:15 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2020-08-25 8:33 ` Eddy_Wu
2020-08-25 11:06 ` [PATCH] kprobes/x86: Fixes NMI context check on x86 kernel test robot
2020-08-25 12:09 ` x86/kprobes: kretprobe fails to triggered if kprobe at function entry is not optimized (trigger by int3 breakpoint) peterz
2020-08-25 13:15 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2020-08-25 13:30 ` peterz
2020-08-25 13:59 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2020-08-25 14:15 ` peterz
2020-08-25 14:10 ` peterz
2020-08-25 14:19 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2020-08-27 9:02 ` peterz
2020-08-26 7:07 ` Eddy_Wu
2020-08-26 8:22 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2020-08-26 9:06 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2020-08-26 10:00 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2020-08-26 10:25 ` peterz
2020-08-26 13:36 ` Eddy_Wu
2020-08-26 13:51 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2020-08-26 9:01 ` peterz
2020-08-26 9:21 ` peterz
2020-08-26 8:31 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2020-08-25 12:20 ` [PATCH] kprobes/x86: Fixes NMI context check on x86 kernel test robot
2020-08-25 12:25 ` kernel test robot
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=20200825073651.GW1362448@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=Eddy_Wu@trendmicro.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=x86@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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®