From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Michael Matz <matz@suse.de>, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
linux-toolchains@vger.kernel.org,
Indu Bhagat <indu.bhagat@oracle.com>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Jose E. Marchesi" <jemarch@gnu.org>,
Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
live-patching@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
Chen Zhongjin <chenzhongjin@huawei.com>,
Sathvika Vasireddy <sv@linux.ibm.com>,
Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Objtool toolchain proposal: -fannotate-{jump-table,noreturn}
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2022 12:34:25 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220914173425.GZ25951@gate.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YyHrX/fTMwfv24W7@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 04:55:27PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 02:28:26PM +0000, Michael Matz wrote:
> > Don't mix DWARF debug info with DWARF-based unwinding info, the latter
> > doesn't imply the former. Out of interest: how does ORC get around the
> > need for CFI annotations (or equivalents to restore registers) and what
>
> Objtool 'interprets' the stackops. So it follows the call-graph and is
> an interpreter for all instructions that modify the stack. Doing that it
> konws what the stackframe is at 'most' places.
To get correct backtraces on e.g. PowerPC you need to emulate many of
the integer insns. That is why GCC enables -fasynchronous-unwind-tables
by default for us.
The same is true for s390, aarch64, and x86 (unless 32-bit w/ frame
pointer).
The problem is that you do not know how to access anything on the stack,
whether in the current frame or in a previous frame, from a random point
in the program. GDB has many heuristics for this, and it still does not
get it right in all cases.
> > makes it fast? I want faster unwinding for DWARF as well, when there's
> > feature parity :-) Maybe something can be learned for integration into
> > dwarf-unwind.
>
> I think we have some details here:
>
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/x86/orc-unwinder.html
It is faster because it does a whole lot less. Is that still enough?
It's not clear (to me) what exact information it wants to provide :-(
Segher
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
x86@kernel.org, Sathvika Vasireddy <sv@linux.ibm.com>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
Chen Zhongjin <chenzhongjin@huawei.com>,
Michael Matz <matz@suse.de>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
linux-toolchains@vger.kernel.org,
Indu Bhagat <indu.bhagat@oracle.com>,
live-patching@vger.kernel.org, Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
"Jose E. Marchesi" <jemarch@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Objtool toolchain proposal: -fannotate-{jump-table,noreturn}
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2022 12:34:25 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220914173425.GZ25951@gate.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YyHrX/fTMwfv24W7@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 04:55:27PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 02:28:26PM +0000, Michael Matz wrote:
> > Don't mix DWARF debug info with DWARF-based unwinding info, the latter
> > doesn't imply the former. Out of interest: how does ORC get around the
> > need for CFI annotations (or equivalents to restore registers) and what
>
> Objtool 'interprets' the stackops. So it follows the call-graph and is
> an interpreter for all instructions that modify the stack. Doing that it
> konws what the stackframe is at 'most' places.
To get correct backtraces on e.g. PowerPC you need to emulate many of
the integer insns. That is why GCC enables -fasynchronous-unwind-tables
by default for us.
The same is true for s390, aarch64, and x86 (unless 32-bit w/ frame
pointer).
The problem is that you do not know how to access anything on the stack,
whether in the current frame or in a previous frame, from a random point
in the program. GDB has many heuristics for this, and it still does not
get it right in all cases.
> > makes it fast? I want faster unwinding for DWARF as well, when there's
> > feature parity :-) Maybe something can be learned for integration into
> > dwarf-unwind.
>
> I think we have some details here:
>
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/x86/orc-unwinder.html
It is faster because it does a whole lot less. Is that still enough?
It's not clear (to me) what exact information it wants to provide :-(
Segher
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Michael Matz <matz@suse.de>, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
linux-toolchains@vger.kernel.org,
Indu Bhagat <indu.bhagat@oracle.com>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Jose E. Marchesi" <jemarch@gnu.org>,
Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
live-patching@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
Chen Zhongjin <chenzhongjin@huawei.com>,
Sathvika Vasireddy <sv@linux.ibm.com>,
Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Objtool toolchain proposal: -fannotate-{jump-table,noreturn}
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2022 12:34:25 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220914173425.GZ25951@gate.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YyHrX/fTMwfv24W7@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 04:55:27PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 02:28:26PM +0000, Michael Matz wrote:
> > Don't mix DWARF debug info with DWARF-based unwinding info, the latter
> > doesn't imply the former. Out of interest: how does ORC get around the
> > need for CFI annotations (or equivalents to restore registers) and what
>
> Objtool 'interprets' the stackops. So it follows the call-graph and is
> an interpreter for all instructions that modify the stack. Doing that it
> konws what the stackframe is at 'most' places.
To get correct backtraces on e.g. PowerPC you need to emulate many of
the integer insns. That is why GCC enables -fasynchronous-unwind-tables
by default for us.
The same is true for s390, aarch64, and x86 (unless 32-bit w/ frame
pointer).
The problem is that you do not know how to access anything on the stack,
whether in the current frame or in a previous frame, from a random point
in the program. GDB has many heuristics for this, and it still does not
get it right in all cases.
> > makes it fast? I want faster unwinding for DWARF as well, when there's
> > feature parity :-) Maybe something can be learned for integration into
> > dwarf-unwind.
>
> I think we have some details here:
>
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/x86/orc-unwinder.html
It is faster because it does a whole lot less. Is that still enough?
It's not clear (to me) what exact information it wants to provide :-(
Segher
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-14 17:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-09 18:07 [RFC] Objtool toolchain proposal: -fannotate-{jump-table,noreturn} Josh Poimboeuf
2022-09-09 18:07 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2022-09-09 18:07 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2022-09-11 15:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-11 15:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-11 15:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-11 15:31 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2022-09-11 15:31 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2022-09-11 15:31 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2022-09-12 10:52 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-09-12 10:52 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-09-12 10:52 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-09-12 14:17 ` Michael Matz
2022-09-12 14:17 ` Michael Matz
2022-09-12 14:17 ` Michael Matz
2022-09-14 0:04 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2022-09-14 0:04 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2022-09-14 0:04 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2022-09-14 14:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-14 14:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-14 14:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-14 14:28 ` Michael Matz
2022-09-14 14:28 ` Michael Matz
2022-09-14 14:28 ` Michael Matz
2022-09-14 14:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-14 14:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-14 14:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-14 17:34 ` Segher Boessenkool [this message]
2022-09-14 17:34 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-09-14 17:34 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-09-15 2:56 ` Chen Zhongjin
2022-09-15 2:56 ` Chen Zhongjin
2022-09-15 2:56 ` Chen Zhongjin
2022-09-15 8:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-15 8:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-15 8:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-20 16:49 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2022-09-20 16:49 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2022-09-20 16:49 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2022-09-21 3:16 ` Chen Zhongjin
2022-09-21 3:16 ` Chen Zhongjin
2022-09-21 3:16 ` Chen Zhongjin
2022-09-12 11:31 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-09-12 11:31 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-09-12 11:31 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-09-14 10:21 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2022-09-14 10:21 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2022-09-14 10:21 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2022-09-14 12:08 ` Michael Matz
2022-09-14 12:08 ` Michael Matz
2022-09-14 12:08 ` Michael Matz
2022-09-14 12:16 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-09-14 12:16 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-09-14 12:16 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-09-13 22:51 ` Indu Bhagat
2022-09-13 22:51 ` Indu Bhagat
2022-09-13 22:51 ` Indu Bhagat
2022-09-14 0:12 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2022-09-14 0:12 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2022-09-14 0:12 ` Josh Poimboeuf
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=20220914173425.GZ25951@gate.crashing.org \
--to=segher@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=chenzhongjin@huawei.com \
--cc=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
--cc=indu.bhagat@oracle.com \
--cc=jemarch@gnu.org \
--cc=jpoimboe@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-toolchains@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=live-patching@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=matz@suse.de \
--cc=mbenes@suse.cz \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sv@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=x86@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: 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.