Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/6] arm64: Kprobes with singlestepping support

[Masami Hiramatsu]

(2013/11/12 19:55), Sandeepa Prabhu wrote:
>>>>> Thanks for steps, ARM64 ftrace patches are under review on arm mailing
>>>>> list, I can contact the (linaro) developer implementing ftrace on
>>>>> what's supported and then figure-out a way to test this concurrency of
>>>>> kprobes breakpoint and hardware breakpoint.
>>>>
>>>> Would you mean this? :)
>>>> http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg278477.html
>>>>
>>>> Wow, it seems that this also has some works around instruction
>>>> manipulation (and confusable filenames...)
>>> I referred to: http://lwn.net/Articles/572323/  which is another
>>> implementation and on LAKML
>>
>> OK, I'll check that (and looks good at a glance).
>> By the way, I concern about Linaro guys who looks working a bit far
>> from the LKML and original feature maintainers. Please contact them,
>> I'm sure they don't bite your hand :)
> Hmm sure, will convey to our developers/leads :-)

Nice :)

>> BTW, I'm currently trying a general housecleaning of __kprobes
>> annotations. It may also have impact on your patch.
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/11/8/187
> Hmm, we can help testing your patchset on arm64 platforms. Also have
> many doubts on the changes you are working [blacklisting probes etc]
> 
> Basically I had tried placing kprobe on memcpy() and the model hung
> (insmod never returned back!). Fast-model I have does not have option
> of any debug so no clue what happened!.

On x86, I can probe memcpy() safely. It depends on the kprobes (and
breakpoint handling) implementation, and it could be found.

> memcpy() is low-level call being used internally within kprobes, so
> probably we cannot handle probe on that routine, but then how to make
> sure all such API are rejected by kprobe sub-system ?

I see, the blacklist still needs to be maintained. I periodically
run a test for probing each function on my kernel, and if I found
such problem, I added it on the blacklist.
Currently I run the test only on x86, so perhaps, other arch does
not have well tested yet.

Thank you,

-- 
Masami HIRAMATSU
IT Management Research Dept. Linux Technology Center
Hitachi, Ltd., Yokohama Research Laboratory
E-mail: masami.hiramatsu.pt@xxxxxxxxxxx


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/