All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: Jiping Ma <Jiping.Ma2@windriver.com>,
	zhe.he@windriver.com, bruce.ashfield@gmail.com,
	yue.tao@windriver.com, will.deacon@arm.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, paul.gortmaker@windriver.com,
	catalin.marinas@arm.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][V3] arm64: perf: Get the wrong PC value in REGS_ABI_32 mode
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2020 18:44:56 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200623174456.GA5087@willie-the-truck> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200623171909.GC4819@willie-the-truck>

On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 06:19:10PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> So, I think we should take this patch (which puts the PC where you'd expect
> to find it for compat tasks) and then we could consider removing the current
> lr/sp fudging as a separate patch, which we could revert if it causes a
> problem. However, I'm not sure I want to open that up.

Patch below...

Will

--->8

From 7452148b87ed8c82826474366dbe536fd960d3a7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jiping Ma <jiping.ma2@windriver.com>
Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 10:52:07 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] arm64: perf: Report the PC value in REGS_ABI_32 mode

A 32-bit perf querying the registers of a compat task using REGS_ABI_32
will receive zeroes from w15, when it expects to find the PC.

Return the PC value for register dwarf register 15 when returning register
values for a compat task to perf.

Signed-off-by: Jiping Ma <jiping.ma2@windriver.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1589165527-188401-1-git-send-email-jiping.ma2@windriver.com
[will: Shuffled code and added a comment]
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
---
 arch/arm64/kernel/perf_regs.c | 16 +++++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_regs.c
index 0bbac612146e..952b26a05d0f 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_regs.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_regs.c
@@ -15,15 +15,25 @@ u64 perf_reg_value(struct pt_regs *regs, int idx)
 		return 0;
 
 	/*
-	 * Compat (i.e. 32 bit) mode:
-	 * - PC has been set in the pt_regs struct in kernel_entry,
-	 * - Handle SP and LR here.
+	 * Our handling of compat tasks (PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_ABI_32) is weird. For
+	 * a 32-bit perf inspecting a 32-bit task, then it will look at the
+	 * first 16 registers. These correspond directly to the registers saved
+	 * in our pt_regs structure, with the exception of the PC, so we copy
+	 * that down (x15 corresponds to SP_hyp in the architecture). So far, so
+	 * good. The oddity arises when a 64-bit perf looks at a 32-bit task and
+	 * asks for registers beyond PERF_REG_ARM_MAX. In this case, we return
+	 * SP_usr, LR_usr and PC in the positions where the AArch64 registers
+	 * would normally live. The initial idea was to allow a 64-bit unwinder
+	 * to unwinder a 32-bit task and, although it's not clear how well that
+	 * works in practice, we're kind of stuck with this interface now.
 	 */
 	if (compat_user_mode(regs)) {
 		if ((u32)idx == PERF_REG_ARM64_SP)
 			return regs->compat_sp;
 		if ((u32)idx == PERF_REG_ARM64_LR)
 			return regs->compat_lr;
+		if (idx == 15)
+			return regs->pc;
 	}
 
 	if ((u32)idx == PERF_REG_ARM64_SP)
-- 
2.27.0.111.gc72c7da667-goog


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: Jiping Ma <Jiping.Ma2@windriver.com>,
	zhe.he@windriver.com, bruce.ashfield@gmail.com,
	yue.tao@windriver.com, will.deacon@arm.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, paul.gortmaker@windriver.com,
	catalin.marinas@arm.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][V3] arm64: perf: Get the wrong PC value in REGS_ABI_32 mode
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2020 18:44:56 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200623174456.GA5087@willie-the-truck> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200623171909.GC4819@willie-the-truck>

On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 06:19:10PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> So, I think we should take this patch (which puts the PC where you'd expect
> to find it for compat tasks) and then we could consider removing the current
> lr/sp fudging as a separate patch, which we could revert if it causes a
> problem. However, I'm not sure I want to open that up.

Patch below...

Will

--->8

From 7452148b87ed8c82826474366dbe536fd960d3a7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jiping Ma <jiping.ma2@windriver.com>
Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 10:52:07 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] arm64: perf: Report the PC value in REGS_ABI_32 mode

A 32-bit perf querying the registers of a compat task using REGS_ABI_32
will receive zeroes from w15, when it expects to find the PC.

Return the PC value for register dwarf register 15 when returning register
values for a compat task to perf.

Signed-off-by: Jiping Ma <jiping.ma2@windriver.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1589165527-188401-1-git-send-email-jiping.ma2@windriver.com
[will: Shuffled code and added a comment]
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
---
 arch/arm64/kernel/perf_regs.c | 16 +++++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_regs.c
index 0bbac612146e..952b26a05d0f 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_regs.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_regs.c
@@ -15,15 +15,25 @@ u64 perf_reg_value(struct pt_regs *regs, int idx)
 		return 0;
 
 	/*
-	 * Compat (i.e. 32 bit) mode:
-	 * - PC has been set in the pt_regs struct in kernel_entry,
-	 * - Handle SP and LR here.
+	 * Our handling of compat tasks (PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_ABI_32) is weird. For
+	 * a 32-bit perf inspecting a 32-bit task, then it will look at the
+	 * first 16 registers. These correspond directly to the registers saved
+	 * in our pt_regs structure, with the exception of the PC, so we copy
+	 * that down (x15 corresponds to SP_hyp in the architecture). So far, so
+	 * good. The oddity arises when a 64-bit perf looks at a 32-bit task and
+	 * asks for registers beyond PERF_REG_ARM_MAX. In this case, we return
+	 * SP_usr, LR_usr and PC in the positions where the AArch64 registers
+	 * would normally live. The initial idea was to allow a 64-bit unwinder
+	 * to unwinder a 32-bit task and, although it's not clear how well that
+	 * works in practice, we're kind of stuck with this interface now.
 	 */
 	if (compat_user_mode(regs)) {
 		if ((u32)idx == PERF_REG_ARM64_SP)
 			return regs->compat_sp;
 		if ((u32)idx == PERF_REG_ARM64_LR)
 			return regs->compat_lr;
+		if (idx == 15)
+			return regs->pc;
 	}
 
 	if ((u32)idx == PERF_REG_ARM64_SP)
-- 
2.27.0.111.gc72c7da667-goog


  reply	other threads:[~2020-06-23 17:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-05-11  2:52 [PATCH][V3] arm64: perf: Get the wrong PC value in REGS_ABI_32 mode Jiping Ma
2020-05-26  2:46 ` Jiping Ma
2020-05-26  2:46   ` Jiping Ma
2020-05-26 10:26 ` Mark Rutland
2020-05-26 10:26   ` Mark Rutland
2020-05-26 19:54   ` Will Deacon
2020-05-26 19:54     ` Will Deacon
2020-05-27  1:30     ` Jiping Ma
2020-05-27  1:30       ` Jiping Ma
2020-05-27 15:03     ` Mark Rutland
2020-05-27 15:03       ` Mark Rutland
2020-05-27  1:33   ` Jiping Ma
2020-05-27  1:33     ` Jiping Ma
2020-05-27 15:19     ` Mark Rutland
2020-05-27 15:19       ` Mark Rutland
2020-05-28  1:06       ` Jiping Ma
2020-05-28  1:06         ` Jiping Ma
2020-05-28  7:54         ` Will Deacon
2020-05-28  7:54           ` Will Deacon
2020-05-29  5:57           ` Jiping Ma
2020-05-29  5:57             ` Jiping Ma
2020-06-18 13:03           ` Mark Rutland
2020-06-18 13:03             ` Mark Rutland
2020-06-23 17:19             ` Will Deacon
2020-06-23 17:19               ` Will Deacon
2020-06-23 17:44               ` Will Deacon [this message]
2020-06-23 17:44                 ` Will Deacon
2020-06-25 12:54                 ` Mark Rutland
2020-06-25 12:54                   ` Mark Rutland

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=20200623174456.GA5087@willie-the-truck \
    --to=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=Jiping.Ma2@windriver.com \
    --cc=bruce.ashfield@gmail.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=paul.gortmaker@windriver.com \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    --cc=yue.tao@windriver.com \
    --cc=zhe.he@windriver.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.