Re: [PATCH dwarves] btf: Generate btf for functions in the .BTF_ids section

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 09:34:30AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 01:38:20PM +0200, Jiri Olsa escreveu:
> > On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 04:26:11PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 2:37 PM Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > BTF is currently generated for functions that are in ftrace list
> > > > or extern.
> > > >
> > > > A recent use case also needs BTF generated for functions included in
> > > > allowlist.  In particular, the kernel
> > > > commit e78aea8b2170 ("bpf: tcp: Put some tcp cong functions in allowlist for bpf-tcp-cc")
> > > > allows bpf program to directly call a few tcp cc kernel functions.  Those
> > > > functions are specified under an ELF section .BTF_ids.  The symbols
> > > > in this ELF section is like __BTF_ID__func__<kernel_func>__[digit]+.
> > > > For example, __BTF_ID__func__cubictcp_init__1.  Those kernel
> > > > functions are currently allowed only if CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE is
> > > > set to ensure they are in the ftrace list but this kconfig dependency
> > > > is unnecessary.
> > > >
> > > > pahole can generate BTF for those kernel functions if it knows they
> > > > are in the allowlist.  This patch is to capture those symbols
> > > > in the .BTF_ids section and generate BTF for them.
> 
> > > I wonder if we just record all functions how bad that would be. Jiri,
> > > do you remember from the time you were experimenting with static
> > > functions how much more functions we'd be recording if we didn't do
> > > ftrace filtering?
>  
> > hum, I can't find that.. but should be just matter of removing
> > that is_ftrace_func check
>  
> > if we decided to do that, maybe we could add some bit indicating
> > that the function is traceable? it would save us check with
> > available_filter_functions file
> 
> You mean encoding it in BTF, in 'struct btf_type'? Seems important to
> have it, there are free bits there:
> 
> /* Max # of type identifier */
> #define BTF_MAX_TYPE    0x000fffff
> /* Max offset into the string section */
> #define BTF_MAX_NAME_OFFSET     0x00ffffff
> /* Max # of struct/union/enum members or func args */
> #define BTF_MAX_VLEN    0xffff
> 
> struct btf_type {
>         __u32 name_off;
>         /* "info" bits arrangement
>          * bits  0-15: vlen (e.g. # of struct's members)
>          * bits 16-23: unused
>          * bits 24-27: kind (e.g. int, ptr, array...etc)
>          * bits 28-30: unused
>          * bit     31: kind_flag, currently used by
>          *             struct, union and fwd
>          */
>         __u32 info;
>         /* "size" is used by INT, ENUM, STRUCT, UNION and DATASEC.
>          * "size" tells the size of the type it is describing.
>          *
>          * "type" is used by PTR, TYPEDEF, VOLATILE, CONST, RESTRICT,
>          * FUNC, FUNC_PROTO and VAR.
>          * "type" is a type_id referring to another type.
>          */
>         union {
>                 __u32 size;
>                 __u32 type;
>         };
> };
> 
> And tools that expect to trace a function can get that information from
> the BTF info instead of getting some failure when trying to trace those
> functions, right?

yep, if it's possible to spare some bit for this info

jirka




[Index of Archives]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux