[lttng-dev] [PATCH lttng-ust] Add ctor/dtor priorities for tracepoints/events

[Mathieu Desnoyers]

----- On Jul 13, 2020, at 11:19 AM, Olivier Dion olivier.dion at polymtl.ca wrote:

> On Mon, 13 Jul 2020, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers at efficios.com> wrote:
[...]
> 
>>>> Also, we should compare two approaches to fulfill your goal:
>>>> one alternative would be to have application/library constructors
>>>> explicitly call tracepoint constructors if they wish to use them.
>>> 
>>> I would prefer this way.  The former solution might not work in some
>>> cases (e.g. with LD_PRELOAD and priority =101) and I prefer explicit
>>> initialization in that case.
>>> 
>>> I don't see any cons for the second approach, except making the symbols
>>> table a few bytes larger.  I'll post a patch soon so we can compare and
>>> try to find more documentation on ctor priority.
>>
>> And users will have to explicitly call the constructor on which they
>> depend, but I don't see it as a huge burden.
> 
> The burden is small indeed.  But users should pay close attention to
> release the references in a destructor too.
> 
>> Beware though that there are a few configurations which can be used for
>> probe providers (see lttng-ust(3)).
> 
> I'm not following you here.  I don't see any configuration for provider
> except TRACEPOINT_LOGLEVEL.  What should I be aware of?

See sections "Statically linking the tracepoint provider" and
"Dynamically loading the tracepoint provider" from lttng-ust(3). It's
especially the dynamic loading I am concerned about, because then it
becomes tricky for an instrumented .so (or app) to call the probe provider's
constructor without dlopening it beforehand, because there are no dependencies
from the instrumented module on probe symbols. And given you plan to call
this from a constructor, it means the dynamic loader lock is already held,
so even if we dlopen the probe provider from the instrumented constructor,
I am not sure the dlopen'd .so's constructor will be allowed to run
immediately.

Maybe one thing that could work for the dynamic loading case would be to:

- let the instrumented constructor dlopen its probe,
- from the instrumented constructor, use dlsym to get the probe's constructor
  symbols.
- call those constructors.

If this is common enough, maybe we would want to provide helpers for this.

Thanks,

Mathieu

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com