From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: "Wangnan (F)" <wangnan0@huawei.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>,
Milian Wolff <milian.wolff@kdab.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pi3orama <pi3orama@163.com>,
lizefan 00213767 <lizefan@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [BUG REPORT] perf tools: x86_64: Broken calllchain when sampling taken at 'callq' instruction
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 09:38:45 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151201083845.GI3816@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151201072826.GB28270@gmail.com>
On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 08:28:26AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Not sure what you're getting at here. We don't need the uncorrected
> > instruction.
>
> Well, we need it for stack unwinding, as you point it out:
>
> > But the problem here is that we rewind the instruction stream, but not
> > the stack. And the stack unwinder is (obviously) interested in the stack
> > state.
>
> Unwinding the stack state would fix it as well - but an equivalent solution would
> be to pass along the original RIP would fix it as well: we'd have a
> self-consistent pair of RIP/RSP.
>
> Especially since unwinding the RSP is probably hard:
>
> > I'm not sure we want (or need) to go undo the specific instruction's
> > stack effect in-kernel. If the !DWARF unwinders are similarly confused
> > we might need to put it in kernel (expensive *groan*). If its only the
> > DWARF muck then its something that can be done in userspace just
> > fine, although we might need to copy slightly more of the stack than SP
> > is pointing at, such that we can undo RET/POP etc. which would have data
> > beyond the head of stack.
> >
> > The easiest solution might be to figure out the biggest stack offset for
> > any instruction and always capture that much over the head of stack.
>
> so I think the problem here is that the RSP does not match up to the RIP. We can
> either pass along the original RIP+RSP, or the fixed up one - but what we do
> currently is that we pass along only half of it - which corrupts dwarf unwinding
> state that doesn't tolerate such errors.
Still not sure what that gets you. Then you get a sample at a known
wrong location, why would you want that?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-12-01 8:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-18 7:20 [BUG REPORT] perf tools: x86_64: Broken calllchain when sampling taken at 'callq' instruction Wangnan (F)
2015-11-18 8:00 ` Wangnan (F)
2015-11-18 8:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-11-18 8:42 ` Wangnan (F)
2015-11-18 8:49 ` Wangnan (F)
2015-11-19 6:37 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-11-19 6:45 ` Wangnan (F)
2015-11-19 10:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-11-19 10:43 ` Wangnan (F)
2015-11-19 11:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-11-19 11:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-11-27 8:38 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-11-30 9:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-12-01 7:28 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-12-01 8:38 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2015-12-01 16:11 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-12-01 17:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-12-02 9:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-11-18 8:48 ` Jiri Olsa
2015-11-18 9:02 ` Wangnan (F)
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=20151201083845.GI3816@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=dsahern@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lizefan@huawei.com \
--cc=milian.wolff@kdab.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=pi3orama@163.com \
--cc=wangnan0@huawei.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.