LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> To: madvenka@linux.microsoft.com Cc: broonie@kernel.org, jpoimboe@redhat.com, ardb@kernel.org, nobuta.keiya@fujitsu.com, sjitindarsingh@gmail.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, jmorris@namei.org, pasha.tatashin@soleen.com, jthierry@redhat.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, live-patching@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v8 1/4] arm64: Make all stack walking functions use arch_stack_walk() Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2021 14:13:44 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20210824131344.GE96738@C02TD0UTHF1T.local> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20210812190603.25326-2-madvenka@linux.microsoft.com> On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 02:06:00PM -0500, madvenka@linux.microsoft.com wrote: > From: "Madhavan T. Venkataraman" <madvenka@linux.microsoft.com> > > Currently, there are multiple functions in ARM64 code that walk the > stack using start_backtrace() and unwind_frame(). Convert all of > them to use arch_stack_walk(). This makes maintenance easier. It would be good to split this into a series of patches as Mark Brown suggested in v7. > Here is the list of functions: > > perf_callchain_kernel() > get_wchan() > return_address() > dump_backtrace() > profile_pc() Note that arch_stack_walk() depends on CONFIG_STACKTRACE (which is not in defconfig), so we'll need to reorganise things such that it's always defined, or factor out the core of that function and add a wrapper such that we can always use it. > Signed-off-by: Madhavan T. Venkataraman <madvenka@linux.microsoft.com> > --- > arch/arm64/include/asm/stacktrace.h | 3 --- > arch/arm64/kernel/perf_callchain.c | 5 +--- > arch/arm64/kernel/process.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++----------- > arch/arm64/kernel/return_address.c | 6 +---- > arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c | 38 +++------------------------- > arch/arm64/kernel/time.c | 22 +++++++++------- > 6 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 70 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/stacktrace.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/stacktrace.h > index 8aebc00c1718..e43dea1c6b41 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/stacktrace.h > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/stacktrace.h > @@ -61,9 +61,6 @@ struct stackframe { > #endif > }; > > -extern int unwind_frame(struct task_struct *tsk, struct stackframe *frame); > -extern void walk_stackframe(struct task_struct *tsk, struct stackframe *frame, > - bool (*fn)(void *, unsigned long), void *data); > extern void dump_backtrace(struct pt_regs *regs, struct task_struct *tsk, > const char *loglvl); > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_callchain.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_callchain.c > index 4a72c2727309..2f289013c9c9 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_callchain.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_callchain.c > @@ -147,15 +147,12 @@ static bool callchain_trace(void *data, unsigned long pc) > void perf_callchain_kernel(struct perf_callchain_entry_ctx *entry, > struct pt_regs *regs) > { > - struct stackframe frame; > - > if (perf_guest_cbs && perf_guest_cbs->is_in_guest()) { > /* We don't support guest os callchain now */ > return; > } > > - start_backtrace(&frame, regs->regs[29], regs->pc); > - walk_stackframe(current, &frame, callchain_trace, entry); > + arch_stack_walk(callchain_trace, entry, current, regs); > } We can also update callchain_trace take the return value of perf_callchain_store into acount, e.g. | static bool callchain_trace(void *data, unsigned long pc) | { | struct perf_callchain_entry_ctx *entry = data; | return perf_callchain_store(entry, pc) == 0; | } > > unsigned long perf_instruction_pointer(struct pt_regs *regs) > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c > index c8989b999250..52c12fd26407 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c > @@ -544,11 +544,28 @@ __notrace_funcgraph struct task_struct *__switch_to(struct task_struct *prev, > return last; > } > > +struct wchan_info { > + unsigned long pc; > + int count; > +}; > + > +static bool get_wchan_cb(void *arg, unsigned long pc) > +{ > + struct wchan_info *wchan_info = arg; > + > + if (!in_sched_functions(pc)) { > + wchan_info->pc = pc; > + return false; > + } > + wchan_info->count--; > + return !!wchan_info->count; > +} This will terminate one entry earlier than the old logic since we used to use a post-increment (testing the prior value), and now we're effectively using a pre-decrement (testing the new value). I don't think that matters all that much in practice, but it might be best to keep the original logic, e.g. initialize `count` to 0 and here do: return wchan_info->count++ < 16; > + > unsigned long get_wchan(struct task_struct *p) > { > - struct stackframe frame; > - unsigned long stack_page, ret = 0; > - int count = 0; > + unsigned long stack_page; > + struct wchan_info wchan_info; > + > if (!p || p == current || task_is_running(p)) > return 0; > > @@ -556,20 +573,12 @@ unsigned long get_wchan(struct task_struct *p) > if (!stack_page) > return 0; > > - start_backtrace(&frame, thread_saved_fp(p), thread_saved_pc(p)); > + wchan_info.pc = 0; > + wchan_info.count = 16; > + arch_stack_walk(get_wchan_cb, &wchan_info, p, NULL); > > - do { > - if (unwind_frame(p, &frame)) > - goto out; > - if (!in_sched_functions(frame.pc)) { > - ret = frame.pc; > - goto out; > - } > - } while (count++ < 16); > - > -out: > put_task_stack(p); > - return ret; > + return wchan_info.pc; > } Other than the comment above, this looks good to me. > unsigned long arch_align_stack(unsigned long sp) > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/return_address.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/return_address.c > index a6d18755652f..92a0f4d434e4 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/return_address.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/return_address.c > @@ -35,15 +35,11 @@ NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(save_return_addr); > void *return_address(unsigned int level) > { > struct return_address_data data; > - struct stackframe frame; > > data.level = level + 2; > data.addr = NULL; > > - start_backtrace(&frame, > - (unsigned long)__builtin_frame_address(0), > - (unsigned long)return_address); > - walk_stackframe(current, &frame, save_return_addr, &data); > + arch_stack_walk(save_return_addr, &data, current, NULL); > > if (!data.level) > return data.addr; Nor that arch_stack_walk() will start with it's caller, so return_address() will be included in the trace where it wasn't previously, which implies we need to skip an additional level. That said, I'm not entirely sure why we need to skip 2 levels today; it might be worth checking that's correct. We should also mark return_address() as noinline to avoid surprises with LTO. > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c > index 8982a2b78acf..1800310f92be 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c > @@ -151,23 +151,21 @@ void notrace walk_stackframe(struct task_struct *tsk, struct stackframe *frame, > } > NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(walk_stackframe); > > -static void dump_backtrace_entry(unsigned long where, const char *loglvl) > +static bool dump_backtrace_entry(void *arg, unsigned long where) > { > + char *loglvl = arg; > printk("%s %pSb\n", loglvl, (void *)where); > + return true; > } > > void dump_backtrace(struct pt_regs *regs, struct task_struct *tsk, > const char *loglvl) > { > - struct stackframe frame; > - int skip = 0; > - > pr_debug("%s(regs = %p tsk = %p)\n", __func__, regs, tsk); > > if (regs) { > if (user_mode(regs)) > return; > - skip = 1; > } We can simplifiy this to: if (regs && user_mode(regs)) return; > > if (!tsk) > @@ -176,36 +174,8 @@ void dump_backtrace(struct pt_regs *regs, struct task_struct *tsk, > if (!try_get_task_stack(tsk)) > return; > > - if (tsk == current) { > - start_backtrace(&frame, > - (unsigned long)__builtin_frame_address(0), > - (unsigned long)dump_backtrace); > - } else { > - /* > - * task blocked in __switch_to > - */ > - start_backtrace(&frame, > - thread_saved_fp(tsk), > - thread_saved_pc(tsk)); > - } > - > printk("%sCall trace:\n", loglvl); > - do { > - /* skip until specified stack frame */ > - if (!skip) { > - dump_backtrace_entry(frame.pc, loglvl); > - } else if (frame.fp == regs->regs[29]) { > - skip = 0; > - /* > - * Mostly, this is the case where this function is > - * called in panic/abort. As exception handler's > - * stack frame does not contain the corresponding pc > - * at which an exception has taken place, use regs->pc > - * instead. > - */ > - dump_backtrace_entry(regs->pc, loglvl); > - } > - } while (!unwind_frame(tsk, &frame)); > + arch_stack_walk(dump_backtrace_entry, (void *)loglvl, tsk, regs); It turns out we currently need this skipping to get the balance the ftrace call stack, and arch_stack_walk() doesn't currently do the right thing when starting from regs. That balancing isn't quite right, and will be wrong in some case when unwinding across exception boundaries; we could implement HAVE_FUNCTION_GRAPH_RET_ADDR_PTR using the FP to solve that. > > put_task_stack(tsk); > } > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/time.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/time.c > index eebbc8d7123e..671b3038a772 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/time.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/time.c > @@ -32,22 +32,26 @@ > #include <asm/stacktrace.h> > #include <asm/paravirt.h> > > +static bool profile_pc_cb(void *arg, unsigned long pc) > +{ > + unsigned long *prof_pc = arg; > + > + if (in_lock_functions(pc)) > + return true; > + *prof_pc = pc; > + return false; > +} > + > unsigned long profile_pc(struct pt_regs *regs) > { > - struct stackframe frame; > + unsigned long prof_pc = 0; > > if (!in_lock_functions(regs->pc)) > return regs->pc; > > - start_backtrace(&frame, regs->regs[29], regs->pc); > - > - do { > - int ret = unwind_frame(NULL, &frame); > - if (ret < 0) > - return 0; > - } while (in_lock_functions(frame.pc)); > + arch_stack_walk(profile_pc_cb, &prof_pc, current, regs); > > - return frame.pc; > + return prof_pc; > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL(profile_pc); Mdoulo the problem above w.r.t. unwinding from regs, this looks good. Thanks, Mark. > > -- > 2.25.1 >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-08-24 13:13 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top [not found] <b45aac2843f16ca759e065ea547ab0afff8c0f01> 2021-08-12 19:05 ` [RFC PATCH v8 0/4] arm64: Reorganize the unwinder and implement stack trace reliability checks madvenka 2021-08-12 19:06 ` [RFC PATCH v8 1/4] arm64: Make all stack walking functions use arch_stack_walk() madvenka 2021-08-24 13:13 ` Mark Rutland [this message] 2021-08-24 17:21 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman 2021-08-24 17:38 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman 2021-08-24 17:38 ` Mark Brown 2021-08-24 17:40 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman 2021-08-26 4:52 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman 2021-10-09 23:41 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman 2021-08-12 19:06 ` [RFC PATCH v8 2/4] arm64: Reorganize the unwinder code for better consistency and maintenance madvenka 2021-08-26 15:46 ` Mark Brown 2021-08-26 23:19 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman 2021-09-01 16:20 ` Mark Brown 2021-09-02 7:10 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman 2021-08-12 19:06 ` [RFC PATCH v8 3/4] arm64: Introduce stack trace reliability checks in the unwinder madvenka 2021-08-24 5:55 ` nobuta.keiya 2021-08-24 12:19 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman 2021-08-25 0:01 ` nobuta.keiya 2021-08-26 15:57 ` Mark Brown 2021-08-26 23:31 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman 2021-08-12 19:06 ` [RFC PATCH v8 4/4] arm64: Create a list of SYM_CODE functions, check return PC against list madvenka 2021-08-12 19:17 ` [RFC PATCH v8 0/4] arm64: Reorganize the unwinder and implement stack trace reliability checks Madhavan T. Venkataraman
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=20210824131344.GE96738@C02TD0UTHF1T.local \ --to=mark.rutland@arm.com \ --cc=ardb@kernel.org \ --cc=broonie@kernel.org \ --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \ --cc=jmorris@namei.org \ --cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \ --cc=jthierry@redhat.com \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=live-patching@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=madvenka@linux.microsoft.com \ --cc=nobuta.keiya@fujitsu.com \ --cc=pasha.tatashin@soleen.com \ --cc=sjitindarsingh@gmail.com \ --cc=will@kernel.org \ /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: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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).