lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Jul]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: strace of io_uring events?
Date


> On Jul 15, 2020, at 4:12 AM, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> This thread is to discuss the possibility of stracing requests
> submitted through io_uring. I'm not directly involved in io_uring
> development, so I'm posting this out of interest in using strace on
> processes utilizing io_uring.
>
> io_uring gives the developer a way to bypass the syscall interface,
> which results in loss of information when tracing. This is a strace
> fragment on "io_uring-cp" from liburing:
>
> io_uring_enter(5, 40, 0, 0, NULL, 8) = 40
> io_uring_enter(5, 1, 0, 0, NULL, 8) = 1
> io_uring_enter(5, 1, 0, 0, NULL, 8) = 1
> ...
>
> What really happens are read + write requests. Without that
> information the strace output is mostly useless.
>
> This loss of information is not new, e.g. calls through the vdso or
> futext fast paths are also invisible to strace. But losing filesystem
> I/O calls are a major blow, imo.
>
> What do people think?
>
> From what I can tell, listing the submitted requests on
> io_uring_enter() would not be hard. Request completion is
> asynchronous, however, and may not require io_uring_enter() syscall.
> Am I correct?
>
> Is there some existing tracing infrastructure that strace could use to
> get async completion events? Should we be introducing one?
>
>

Let’s add some seccomp folks. We probably also want to be able to run seccomp-like filters on io_uring requests. So maybe io_uring should call into seccomp-and-tracing code for each action.
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-07-15 16:36    [W:0.082 / U:1.140 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site