LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
	Nicolai Stange <nstange@suse.de>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	x86@kernel.org, Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>,
	Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
	Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@redhat.com>,
	Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
	Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
	Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>, Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>,
	Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
	Nayna Jain <nayna@linux.ibm.com>,
	Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>,
	Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>,
	linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] x86/kprobes: Fix frame pointer annotations
Date: Thu, 9 May 2019 10:20:30 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190509102030.dfa62e058f09d0d8cbdd6053@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190508184848.qerg3flv3ej3xsev@treble>

Hi Josh,

On Wed, 8 May 2019 13:48:48 -0500
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 05:39:07PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 07:42:48AM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 02:04:16PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > 
> > > > Do the x86_64 variants also want some ORC annotation?
> > > 
> > > Maybe so.  Though it looks like regs->ip isn't saved.  The saved
> > > registers might need to be tweaked.  I'll need to look into it.
> > 
> > What all these sites do (and maybe we should look at unifying them
> > somehow) is turn a CALL frame (aka RET-IP) into an exception frame (aka
> > pt_regs).
> > 
> > So regs->ip will be the return address (which is fixed up to be the CALL
> > address in the handler).
> 
> But from what I can tell, trampoline_handler() hard-codes regs->ip to
> point to kretprobe_trampoline(), and the original return address is
> placed in regs->sp.
> 
> Masami, is there a reason why regs->ip doesn't have the original return
> address and regs->sp doesn't have the original SP?  I think that would
> help the unwinder understand things.

Yes, for regs->ip, there is a histrical reason. Since previously, we had
an int3 at trampoline, so the user (kretprobe) handler expects that
regs->ip is trampoline address and ri->ret_addr is original return address.
It is better to check the other archs, but I think it is possible to
change the regs->ip to original return address, since no one cares such
"fixed address". :)

For the regs->sp, there are 2 reasons.

For x86-64, it's just for over-optimizing (reduce stack usage).
I think we can make a gap for putting return address, something like

	"kretprobe_trampoline:\n"
#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
	"	pushq %rsp\n"	/* Make a gap for return address */
	"	pushq 0(%rsp)\n"	/* Copy original stack pointer */
	"	pushfq\n"
	SAVE_REGS_STRING
	"	movq %rsp, %rdi\n"
	"	call trampoline_handler\n"
	/* Push the true return address to the bottom */
	"	movq %rax, 20*8(%rsp)\n"
	RESTORE_REGS_STRING
	"	popfq\n"
	"	addq $8, %rsp\n"	/* Skip original stack pointer */

For i386 (x86-32), there is no other way to keep &regs->sp as
the original stack pointer. It has to be changed with this series,
maybe as same as x86-64.

Thank you,

-- 
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>

  reply	other threads:[~2019-05-09  1:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-05-08  7:49 [PATCH 0/4] x86: int3 fallout Peter Zijlstra
2019-05-08  7:49 ` [PATCH 1/4] x86/entry/32: Clean up return from interrupt preemption path Peter Zijlstra
2019-05-08  7:49 ` [PATCH 2/4] x86/kprobes: Fix frame pointer annotations Peter Zijlstra
2019-05-08 11:54   ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-05-08 12:04     ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-05-08 12:40       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-05-08 12:42       ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-05-08 15:39         ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-05-08 18:48           ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-05-09  1:20             ` Masami Hiramatsu [this message]
2019-05-09  8:14               ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-05-09  9:27                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-05-09 14:00                 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-05-09 14:01                 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2019-05-09 17:14                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-05-10  4:58                     ` Masami Hiramatsu
2019-05-10 12:31                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-05-11  0:52                         ` Masami Hiramatsu
2019-05-10 12:40                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-05-11  0:56                         ` Masami Hiramatsu
2019-05-13  8:15                           ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-05-09 16:20                 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-05-09 17:18                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-05-09 17:43                   ` Steven Rostedt
2019-05-10  3:21                     ` Masami Hiramatsu
2019-05-10 12:14                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-05-10 12:17                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-05-10 14:54                         ` Steven Rostedt
2019-05-09 17:37                 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-05-09 18:26                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-05-09 18:36                     ` Steven Rostedt
2019-05-08  7:49 ` [PATCH 3/4] x86/ftrace: Add pt_regs frame annotations Peter Zijlstra
2019-05-08  7:49 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/4] x86_32: Provide consistent pt_regs Peter Zijlstra
2019-05-08 11:57   ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-05-08 12:46     ` Ingo Molnar
2019-05-08 20:58   ` Linus Torvalds

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20190509102030.dfa62e058f09d0d8cbdd6053@kernel.org \
    --to=mhiramat@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jgross@suse.com \
    --cc=jikos@kernel.org \
    --cc=joe.lawrence@redhat.com \
    --cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
    --cc=jroedel@suse.de \
    --cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=mbenes@suse.cz \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=nayna@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
    --cc=nstange@suse.de \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=pmladek@suse.com \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=yamada.masahiro@socionext.com \
    --cc=zohar@linux.ibm.com \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH 2/4] x86/kprobes: Fix frame pointer annotations' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).