Re: [PATCH] x86/tracing: introduce enter/exit tracepoint pairs for page faults
From: Steven Rostedt
Date: Mon Apr 14 2025 - 19:42:22 EST
On Mon, 14 Apr 2025 16:37:19 -0700
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 4/14/25 16:22, Junxuan Liao wrote:
> > On 4/14/25 6:14 PM, Junxuan Liao wrote:
> >> Do people find separate user/kernel tracepoints useful? For me, I can
> >> check regs in eBPF tracing code instead.
> > I think it might be good to add a field to the tracepoints to indicate
> > whether it's in user space or not.
>
> Sounds sane to me. Doing something like this:
>
> TP_STRUCT__entry(
> __field( unsigned long, address )
> __field( unsigned long, ip )
> + __field( bool , user_mode)
> __field( unsigned long, error_code )
> ),
>
> TP_fast_assign(
> __entry->address = address;
> __entry->ip = regs->ip;
> + __entry->user_mode = user_mode(regs);
> __entry->error_code = error_code;
> ),
>
> seems highly superior to having two sets of tracepoints and static keys.
I agree.
Acked-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
-- Steve