Hi Jiri,
On Sun, 31 Mar 2024 21:37:03 +0200
Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 03:30:11PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 3:21 AM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > Add uretprobe syscall test that compares register values before
> > > and after the uretprobe is hit. It also compares the register
> > > values seen from attached bpf program.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > tools/include/linux/compiler.h | 4 +
> > > .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/uprobe_syscall.c | 163 ++++++++++++++++++
> > > .../selftests/bpf/progs/uprobe_syscall.c | 15 ++
> > > 3 files changed, 182 insertions(+)
> > > create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/uprobe_syscall.c
> > > create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/uprobe_syscall.c
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > +__naked unsigned long uprobe_syscall_arch_test(void)
> > > +{
> > > + asm volatile (
> > > + "movq $0xdeadbeef, %rax\n"
> > > + "ret\n"
> > > + );
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +__naked void uprobe_syscall_arch(struct pt_regs *before, struct pt_regs *after)
> >
> > don't you get compiler warnings for using __naked with explicit
> > function arguments?
>
> nope, both gcc and clang are silent
>
> >
> > > +{
> > > + asm volatile (
> > > + "movq %r15, 0(%rdi)\n"
> > > + "movq %r14, 8(%rdi)\n"
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > + err = uprobe_syscall__attach(skel);
> > > + if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "uprobe_syscall__attach"))
> > > + goto cleanup;
> > > +
> > > + uprobe_syscall_arch(&before, &after);
> >
> > uprobe_syscall_arch() doesn't really do an explicit `syscall
> > uretprobe`, it should work for int3-based uretprobes as well? Let's
> > call it something a bit more generic then?
>
> ok, how about
>
> uprobe_syscall_arch -> uretprobe_regs
> uprobe_syscall_arch_test -> uretprobe_regs_trigger
>
> >
> > Also, I think patch #1 will go through Masami's trace tree, right? But
> > we can land selftests into bpf-next even before that, given they
> > should work for both syscall and interrupt based uretprobes.
>
> hm, not sure.. I did not originally cc Masami/Steven :-\ adding now
Would you mean this patch?
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240327102036.543283-2-jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx/
It seems you don't Cc/To me nor linux-kernel-trace ML.
>
> Masami, could patch 1 go through:
>
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/trace/linux-trace.git
> probes/for-next
Could you resend it to linux-kernel-trace ML? (only the first one?)
Thank you,
>
> thanks,
> jirka
--
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx>
