From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Jordan Rife <jrife@google.com>,
acme@kernel.org, alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com,
andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com, ast@kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
joel@joelfernandes.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
mark.rutland@arm.com, mhiramat@kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com,
mjeanson@efficios.com, namhyung@kernel.org, paulmck@kernel.org,
peterz@infradead.org,
syzbot+b390c8062d8387b6272a@syzkaller.appspotmail.com,
yhs@fb.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1] tracing: Fix syscall tracepoint use-after-free
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2024 11:17:38 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <da4beb18-7bed-41bd-aeba-94497eff0b58@efficios.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b961bc6b-331c-4315-b424-60d514cc112e@efficios.com>
On 2024-10-26 10:25, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> On 2024-10-26 03:13, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>> On Fri, 25 Oct 2024 15:38:48 -0400
>> Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> I'm curious if it might be better to add some field to struct
>>>> tracepoint like "sleepable" rather than adding a special case here
>>>> based on the name? Of course, if it's only ever going to be these
>>>> two cases then maybe adding a new field doesn't make sense.
>>>
>>> I know Steven is reluctant to bloat the tracepoint struct because there
>>> are lots of tracepoint instances (thousands). So for now I thought that
>>> just comparing the name would be a good start.
>>
>> You are correct. I really trying to keep the footprint of
>> tracepoints/events down.
>>
>>>
>>> We can eventually go a different route as well: introduce a section just
>>> to put the syscall tracepoints, and compare the struct tracepoint
>>> pointers to the section begin/end range. But it's rather complex
>>> for what should remain a simple fix.
>>
>> A separate section could work.
>
> I have another approach to suggest: it shrinks the
> size of struct tracepoint from 80 bytes down to 72 bytes
> on x86-64, we don't have to do any section/linker
> script trickery, and it's extensible for future flags:
>
> struct static_key {
> int enabled;
> void *p;
> };
>
> struct static_key_false {
> struct static_key key;
> };
>
> struct static_call_key {
> void *func;
> void *p;
> };
>
> struct tracepoint {
> const char *name; /* Tracepoint name */
> struct static_key_false key;
> struct static_call_key *static_call_key;
> void *static_call_tramp;
> void *iterator;
> void *probestub;
> void *funcs;
> /* Flags. */
> unsigned int regfunc:1,
> syscall:1;
> };
>
> struct tracepoint_regfunc {
> struct tracepoint tp;
> int (*regfunc)(void);
> void (*unregfunc)(void);
> };
>
> Basically, a tracepoint with regfunc would define a
> struct tracepoint_regfunc rather than a struct tracepoint.
> So we remove both regfunc and unregfunc NULL pointers in
> the common case, which gives us plenty of room for flags.
>
> When we want to access the regfunc/unregfunc from
> a struct tracepoint, we check the regfunc flag, and
> if set, we can use container_of() to get the struct
> tracepoint_regfunc.
Actually I can achieve the same space saving with fewer
changes like this:
struct tracepoint_ext {
void *regfunc;
void *unregfunc;
/* Flags. */
unsigned int syscall:1;
}
struct tracepoint {
const char *name; /* Tracepoint name */
struct static_key_false key;
struct static_call_key *static_call_key;
void *static_call_tramp;
void *iterator;
void *probestub;
void *funcs;
struct tracepoint_ext *ext;
};
Thanks,
Mathieu
>
> Thoughts ?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mathieu
>
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
https://www.efficios.com
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-26 15:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-25 18:21 Mathieu Desnoyers
2024-10-25 19:08 ` Jordan Rife
2024-10-25 19:38 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2024-10-26 7:13 ` Steven Rostedt
2024-10-26 14:25 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2024-10-26 15:17 ` Mathieu Desnoyers [this message]
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=da4beb18-7bed-41bd-aeba-94497eff0b58@efficios.com \
--to=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=jrife@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mjeanson@efficios.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=syzbot+b390c8062d8387b6272a@syzkaller.appspotmail.com \
--cc=yhs@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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®