Re: [PATCH v2 linux-trace 1/8] tracing: attach eBPF programs to tracepoints and syscalls

[Alexei Starovoitov]

On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 4:35 AM, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Right.  I think bpf programs belong to a user process but events are
>>> global resource.  Maybe you also need to consider attaching bpf
>>> program via perf (ioctl?) interface..
>>
>> yes. I did. Please see my reply to Masami.
>> ioctl only works for tracepoints.
>
> What was the problem of kprobes then? :)

Looks like I misread the logic of attaching a filter via perf ioctl.
Looking at it again it seems to be a major change in design:
Instead of adding into ftrace_raw_* helpers, I would add
to perf_trace_* helpers which are very stack heavy
because of 'pt_regs'
Ex: perf_trace_kfree_skb() is using 224 bytes of stack
whereas ftrace_raw_event_kfree_skb() only 80.
which doesn't help in my quest for lowest overhead.
And the discussion about soft- and auto- enable/disable
becomes meaningless, since there is no such things
when it goes through perf events.
I guess it means no hooks through tracefs...
Anyway, I'll hook it up and see which way is cleaner.
--
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/