From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Stefani Seibold <stefani@seibold.net>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Americo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RFC x86_64 more accurate KSTK_ESP implementation
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 12:35:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091108113546.GN11372@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1257409189.26874.18.camel@wall-e>
* Stefani Seibold <stefani@seibold.net> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this is a RFC for a more accurate KSTK_ESP implementation for the x86_64
> architecture.
>
> Because the usersp will be only updated by a context switch this value
> is most of the time outdated. This patch update the per CPU variable
> old_rsp in the device and timer interrupt too.
>
> In my opinion this can be save done if the current stack pointer is
> outside the kernel stack of the current task and the instruction pointer
> is not inside the kernel.
>
> The old_rsp value will be stored in usersp in case of a context switch.
>
> The KSTK_ESP will get the value from old_rsp in case the task is the
> current task, otherwise it will read usersp.
>
> I know about the performance coast, so this is why i ask for comments.
>
> Stefani
>
> Signed-off-by: Stefani Seibold <stefani@seibold.net>
>
> include/asm/processor.h | 4 +++-
> kernel/apic/apic.c | 3 +++
> kernel/irq_64.c | 1 +
> kernel/process_64.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
> 4 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> --- linux-2.6.32-rc5.old/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h 2009-10-16 02:41:50.000000000 +0200
> +++ linux-2.6.32-rc5.new/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h 2009-11-05 08:28:23.765300812 +0100
> @@ -1000,7 +1000,7 @@
> #define thread_saved_pc(t) (*(unsigned long *)((t)->thread.sp - 8))
>
> #define task_pt_regs(tsk) ((struct pt_regs *)(tsk)->thread.sp0 - 1)
> -#define KSTK_ESP(tsk) -1 /* sorry. doesn't work for syscall. */
> +extern unsigned long KSTK_ESP(struct task_struct *task);
> #endif /* CONFIG_X86_64 */
>
> extern void start_thread(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long new_ip,
> @@ -1052,4 +1052,6 @@
> return ratio;
> }
>
> +extern void update_usersp(struct pt_regs *regs);
> +
> #endif /* _ASM_X86_PROCESSOR_H */
> --- linux-2.6.32-rc5.old/arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c 2009-10-16 02:41:50.000000000 +0200
> +++ linux-2.6.32-rc5.new/arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c 2009-11-05 08:52:39.965227285 +0100
> @@ -664,3 +664,23 @@
> return do_arch_prctl(current, code, addr);
> }
>
> +void update_usersp(struct pt_regs *regs)
> +{
> + unsigned long stk = (unsigned long)task_stack_page(current);
> + unsigned long stkp = (regs)->sp;
Cleanliness: no need for that parenthesis.
> +
> + if (((stkp < stk) || (stkp >= stk + THREAD_SIZE))
> + && regs->ip < PAGE_OFFSET)
> + percpu_write(old_rsp, stkp);
> +}
that check for regs->ip looks imprecise - why dont you use the
user_mode_vm()?
It's true that the value itself is statistical, but still we dont want
to leak a kernel-space regs->sp reason - it's an information leak.
> +
> +unsigned long KSTK_ESP(struct task_struct *task)
> +{
> + if (test_tsk_thread_flag(task, TIF_IA32))
> + return task_pt_regs(task)->sp;
> +
> + if (task != current)
> + return task->thread.usersp;
> +
> + return percpu_read(old_rsp);
> +}
> --- linux-2.6.32-rc5.old/arch/x86/kernel/irq_64.c 2009-10-16 02:41:50.000000000 +0200
> +++ linux-2.6.32-rc5.new/arch/x86/kernel/irq_64.c 2009-11-04 22:29:55.762951577 +0100
> @@ -53,6 +53,7 @@
> struct irq_desc *desc;
>
> stack_overflow_check(regs);
> + update_usersp(regs);
>
>
> desc = irq_to_desc(irq);
> if (unlikely(!desc))
> --- linux-2.6.32-rc5.old/arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c 2009-10-16 02:41:50.000000000 +0200
> +++ linux-2.6.32-rc5.new/arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c 2009-11-04 23:12:32.805086991 +0100
> @@ -831,6 +831,9 @@
> {
> struct pt_regs *old_regs = set_irq_regs(regs);
>
> +#ifndef CONFIG_X86_32
> + update_usersp(regs);
> +#endif
Cleanliness: please eliminate this #ifdef by defining update_usersp() on
32-bit as well, as an empty inline function.
But, i dont like this patch because it adds overhead to the IRQ
fastpath.
I'd suggest a competely different method: why dont you use an IPI to
sample the SP whenever someone wants to read it from /proc and we see
that the task is running on a CPU right now?
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-11-08 11:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-11-03 7:31 [PATCH] update fix X86_64 procfs provide stack information for threads Stefani Seibold
2009-11-03 8:28 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-03 9:06 ` Stefani Seibold
2009-11-03 18:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-05 8:19 ` [PATCH] RFC x86_64 more accurate KSTK_ESP implementation Stefani Seibold
2009-11-05 11:08 ` Andi Kleen
2009-11-05 12:11 ` Stefani Seibold
2009-11-08 11:35 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2009-11-08 12:51 ` Stefani Seibold
2009-11-08 12:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-08 14:00 ` Stefani Seibold
2009-11-08 16:34 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-11-08 19:37 ` Andi Kleen
2009-11-05 13:02 ` [PATCH] fix /proc/<pid>/stat stack pointer for kernel threads Stefani Seibold
2009-11-13 8:01 ` [tip:x86/urgent] fs: " Stefani Seibold
2009-11-04 11:17 ` [PATCH] update fix X86_64 procfs provide stack information for threads Andi Kleen
2009-11-04 11:50 ` Stefani Seibold
2009-11-04 12:00 ` Andi Kleen
2009-11-04 12:22 ` Stefani Seibold
2009-11-04 15:42 ` Stefani Seibold
2009-11-04 22:21 ` Stefani Seibold
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=20091108113546.GN11372@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stefani@seibold.net \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com \
/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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.