On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 12:10 AM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Adding new link type BPF_LINK_TYPE_KPROBE to attach kprobes
> directly through register_kprobe/kretprobe API.
>
> Adding new attach type BPF_TRACE_RAW_KPROBE that enables
> such link for kprobe program.
>
> The new link allows to create multiple kprobes link by using
> new link_create interface:
>
> struct {
> __aligned_u64 addrs;
> __u32 cnt;
> __u64 bpf_cookie;
I'm afraid bpf_cookie has to be different for each addr, otherwise
it's severely limiting. So it would be an array of cookies alongside
an array of addresses
> } kprobe;
>
> Plus new flag BPF_F_KPROBE_RETURN for link_create.flags to
> create return probe.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> include/linux/bpf_types.h | 1 +
> include/uapi/linux/bpf.h | 12 +++
> kernel/bpf/syscall.c | 191 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h | 12 +++
> 4 files changed, 211 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
[...]
> @@ -1111,6 +1113,11 @@ enum bpf_link_type {
> */
> #define BPF_F_SLEEPABLE (1U << 4)
>
> +/* link_create flags used in LINK_CREATE command for BPF_TRACE_RAW_KPROBE
> + * attach type.
> + */
> +#define BPF_F_KPROBE_RETURN (1U << 0)
> +
we have plenty of flexibility to have per-link type fields, so why not
add `bool is_retprobe` next to addrs and cnt?
> /* When BPF ldimm64's insn[0].src_reg != 0 then this can have
> * the following extensions:
> *
> @@ -1465,6 +1472,11 @@ union bpf_attr {
> */
> __u64 bpf_cookie;
> } perf_event;
> + struct {
> + __aligned_u64 addrs;
> + __u32 cnt;
> + __u64 bpf_cookie;
> + } kprobe;
> };
> } link_create;
>
[...]
