On Wed, Mar 5, 2025 at 7:22 AM Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 03/04, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > > > Currently, uprobe_write_opcode() implements COW-breaking manually, which is > > really far from ideal. > > To say at least ;) > > David, thanks for doing this. I'll try to read 3/3 tomorrow, but I don't > think I can really help. Let me repeat, this code was written many years > ago, I forgot everything, and today my understanding of mm/ is very poor. > But I'll try anyway. > > > Are there any uprobe tests / benchmarks that are worth running? > > All I know about uprobe tests is that bpf people run a lot of tests which > use uprobes. > > Andrii, Jiri, what you advise? > We do have a bunch of tests within BPF selftests: cd tools/testing/selftest/bpf && make -j$(nproc) && sudo ./test_progs -t uprobe I also built an uprobe-stress tool to validate uprobe optimizations I was doing, this one is the most stand-alone thing to use for testing, please consider checking that. You can find it at [0], and see also [1] and [2] where I was helping Peter to build it from sources, so that might be useful for you as well, if you run into problems with building. Running something like `sudo ./uprobe-stress -a10 -t5 -m5 -f3` would hammer on this quite a bit. I'm just about to leave on a short vacation, so won't have time to go over patches, but I plan to look at them when I'm back next week. [0] https://github.com/libbpf/libbpf-bootstrap/tree/uprobe-stress [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-trace-kernel/CAEf4BzZ+ygwfk8FKn5AS_Ny=igvGcFzdDLE2FjcvwjCKazEWMA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-trace-kernel/CAEf4BzZqKCR-EQz6LTi-YvFY4RnYb_NnQXtwgZCv6aUo7gjkHg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Oleg. >
