aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/kernel/kprobes.c
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAge
* [PATCH] jprobes: allow a jprobe to coexist with muliple kprobesPrasanna S Panchamukhi2005-06-23
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Presently either multiple kprobes or only one jprobe could be inserted. This patch removes the above limitation and allows one jprobe and multiple kprobes to coexist at the same address. However multiple jprobes cannot coexist with multiple kprobes. Currently I am working on the prototype to allow multiple jprobes coexist with multiple kprobes. Signed-off-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanhalli <amavin@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Prasanna S Panchamukhi <prasanna@in.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
* [PATCH] kprobes: Temporary disarming of reentrant probePrasanna S Panchamukhi2005-06-23
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | In situations where a kprobes handler calls a routine which has a probe on it, then kprobes_handler() disarms the new probe forever. This patch removes the above limitation by temporarily disarming the new probe. When the another probe hits while handling the old probe, the kprobes_handler() saves previous kprobes state and handles the new probe without calling the new kprobes registered handlers. kprobe_post_handler() restores back the previous kprobes state and the normal execution continues. However on x86_64 architecture, re-rentrancy is provided only through pre_handler(). If a routine having probe is referenced through post_handler(), then the probes on that routine are disarmed forever, since the exception stack is gets changed after the processor single steps the instruction of the new probe. This patch includes generic changes to support temporary disarming on reentrancy of probes. Signed-of-by: Prasanna S Panchamukhi <prasanna@in.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
* [PATCH] kprobes: moves lock-unlock to non-arch kprobe_flush_taskHien Nguyen2005-06-23
| | | | | | | | | | This patch moves the lock/unlock of the arch specific kprobe_flush_task() to the non-arch specific kprobe_flusk_task(). Signed-off-by: Hien Nguyen <hien@us.ibm.com> Acked-by: Prasanna S Panchamukhi <prasanna@in.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
* [PATCH] Move kprobe [dis]arming into arch specific codeRusty Lynch2005-06-23
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | The architecture independent code of the current kprobes implementation is arming and disarming kprobes at registration time. The problem is that the code is assuming that arming and disarming is a just done by a simple write of some magic value to an address. This is problematic for ia64 where our instructions look more like structures, and we can not insert break points by just doing something like: *p->addr = BREAKPOINT_INSTRUCTION; The following patch to 2.6.12-rc4-mm2 adds two new architecture dependent functions: * void arch_arm_kprobe(struct kprobe *p) * void arch_disarm_kprobe(struct kprobe *p) and then adds the new functions for each of the architectures that already implement kprobes (spar64/ppc64/i386/x86_64). I thought arch_[dis]arm_kprobe was the most descriptive of what was really happening, but each of the architectures already had a disarm_kprobe() function that was really a "disarm and do some other clean-up items as needed when you stumble across a recursive kprobe." So... I took the liberty of changing the code that was calling disarm_kprobe() to call arch_disarm_kprobe(), and then do the cleanup in the block of code dealing with the recursive kprobe case. So far this patch as been tested on i386, x86_64, and ppc64, but still needs to be tested in sparc64. Signed-off-by: Rusty Lynch <rusty.lynch@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Anil S Keshavamurthy <anil.s.keshavamurthy@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
* [PATCH] kprobes: function-return probesHien Nguyen2005-06-23
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | This patch adds function-return probes to kprobes for the i386 architecture. This enables you to establish a handler to be run when a function returns. 1. API Two new functions are added to kprobes: int register_kretprobe(struct kretprobe *rp); void unregister_kretprobe(struct kretprobe *rp); 2. Registration and unregistration 2.1 Register To register a function-return probe, the user populates the following fields in a kretprobe object and calls register_kretprobe() with the kretprobe address as an argument: kp.addr - the function's address handler - this function is run after the ret instruction executes, but before control returns to the return address in the caller. maxactive - The maximum number of instances of the probed function that can be active concurrently. For example, if the function is non- recursive and is called with a spinlock or mutex held, maxactive = 1 should be enough. If the function is non-recursive and can never relinquish the CPU (e.g., via a semaphore or preemption), NR_CPUS should be enough. maxactive is used to determine how many kretprobe_instance objects to allocate for this particular probed function. If maxactive <= 0, it is set to a default value (if CONFIG_PREEMPT maxactive=max(10, 2 * NR_CPUS) else maxactive=NR_CPUS) For example: struct kretprobe rp; rp.kp.addr = /* entrypoint address */ rp.handler = /*return probe handler */ rp.maxactive = /* e.g., 1 or NR_CPUS or 0, see the above explanation */ register_kretprobe(&rp); The following field may also be of interest: nmissed - Initialized to zero when the function-return probe is registered, and incremented every time the probed function is entered but there is no kretprobe_instance object available for establishing the function-return probe (i.e., because maxactive was set too low). 2.2 Unregister To unregiter a function-return probe, the user calls unregister_kretprobe() with the same kretprobe object as registered previously. If a probed function is running when the return probe is unregistered, the function will return as expected, but the handler won't be run. 3. Limitations 3.1 This patch supports only the i386 architecture, but patches for x86_64 and ppc64 are anticipated soon. 3.2 Return probes operates by replacing the return address in the stack (or in a known register, such as the lr register for ppc). This may cause __builtin_return_address(0), when invoked from the return-probed function, to return the address of the return-probes trampoline. 3.3 This implementation uses the "Multiprobes at an address" feature in 2.6.12-rc3-mm3. 3.4 Due to a limitation in multi-probes, you cannot currently establish a return probe and a jprobe on the same function. A patch to remove this limitation is being tested. This feature is required by SystemTap (http://sourceware.org/systemtap), and reflects ideas contributed by several SystemTap developers, including Will Cohen and Ananth Mavinakayanahalli. Signed-off-by: Hien Nguyen <hien@us.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Prasanna S Panchamukhi <prasanna@in.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Frederik Deweerdt <frederik.deweerdt@laposte.net> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
* [PATCH] kprobes: Allow multiple kprobes at the same addressAnanth N Mavinakayanahalli2005-05-05
| | | | | | | | | | Allow registration of multiple kprobes at an address in an architecture agnostic way. Corresponding handlers will be invoked in a sequence. But, a kprobe and a jprobe can't (yet) co-exist at the same address. Signed-off-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <amavin@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
* [PATCH] Kprobes: Oops! in unregister_kprobe()Prasanna S Panchamukhi2005-05-05
| | | | | | | | | | kernel oops! when unregister_kprobe() is called on a non-registered kprobe. This patch fixes the above problem by checking if the probe exists before unregistering. Signed-off-by: Prasanna S Panchamukhi <prasanna@in.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
* Linux-2.6.12-rc2v2.6.12-rc2Linus Torvalds2005-04-16
Initial git repository build. I'm not bothering with the full history, even though we have it. We can create a separate "historical" git archive of that later if we want to, and in the meantime it's about 3.2GB when imported into git - space that would just make the early git days unnecessarily complicated, when we don't have a lot of good infrastructure for it. Let it rip!