Frédéric Weisbecker wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 2009/5/9 Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx>:
[...]
>> +
>> +/* event recording functions */
>> +static void kprobe_trace_record(unsigned long ip, struct trace_probe *tp,
>> + struct pt_regs *regs)
>> +{
>> + __trace_bprintk(ip, "%s%s%+ld\n",
>> + probe_is_return(tp) ? "<-" : "@",
>> + probe_symbol(tp), probe_offset(tp));
>> +}
>
>
>
> What happens here if you have:
>
> kprobe_trace_record() {
> probe_symbol() {
> .... probes_open() {
> cleanup_all_probes() {
> free_trace_probe();
> return tp->symbol ? ....; //crack!
>
> I wonder if you shouldn't use a per_cpu list of probes,
> spinlocked/irqsaved accessed
> and also a kind of prevention against nmi.
Sure, cleanup_all_probes() invokes unregister_kprobe() via
unregister_trace_probe(), which waits running probe-handlers by
using synchronize_sched()(because kprobes disables preemption
around its handlers), before free_trace_probe().
So you don't need any locks there :-)
Thank you,
--
Masami Hiramatsu
Software Engineer
Hitachi Computer Products (America) Inc.
Software Solutions Division
e-mail: mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
