From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] ARM: perf: Implement perf_arch_fetch_caller_regs
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 14:53:42 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130715135342.GF10000@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1373685434-1581-1-git-send-email-jld@mozilla.com>
Hi Jed,
On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 04:17:14AM +0100, Jed Davis wrote:
> We need a perf_arch_fetch_caller_regs for at least some software events
> to be able to get a callchain; even user stacks won't work without
> at least the CPSR bits for non-user-mode (see perf_callchain). In
> particular, profiling context switches needs this.
>
> This records the state of the point at which perf_arch_fetch_caller_regs
> is expanded, instead of that function activation's call site, because we
> need SP and PC to be consistent for EHABI unwinding; hopefully nothing
> will be inconvenienced by the extra stack frame.
[...]
> +#ifdef CONFIG_THUMB2_KERNEL
> +#define perf_arch_fetch_caller_regs(regs, ip) \
> + do { \
> + __u32 _cpsr, _pc; \
> + __asm__ __volatile__("str r7, [%[_regs], #(7 * 4)]\n\t" \
> + "str r13, [%[_regs], #(13 * 4)]\n\t" \
> + "str r14, [%[_regs], #(14 * 4)]\n\t" \
Is this safe? How can we be sure that the registers haven't been clobbered
by the callee before this macro is expanded? For example, you can end up
with the following code:
00000058 <perf_ftrace_function_call>:
58: e92d 43f0 stmdb sp!, {r4, r5, r6, r7, r8, r9, lr}
5c: b09b sub sp, #108 ; 0x6c
5e: ac08 add r4, sp, #32
60: 4681 mov r9, r0
62: 4688 mov r8, r1
64: 4620 mov r0, r4
66: 2148 movs r1, #72 ; 0x48
68: f7ff fffe bl 0 <__memzero>
6c: 61e7 str r7, [r4, #28]
6e: f8c4 d034 str.w sp, [r4, #52] ; 0x34
72: f8c4 e038 str.w lr, [r4, #56] ; 0x38
but the call to __memzero will have corrupted the lr.
> + "mov %[_pc], r15\n\t" \
> + "mrs %[_cpsr], cpsr\n\t" \
> + : [_cpsr] "=r" (_cpsr), \
> + [_pc] "=r" (_pc) \
> + : [_regs] "r" (&(regs)->uregs) \
It would be cleaner to pass a separate argument for each register, using the
ARM_rN macros rather than calculating the offset by hand.
Will
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-07-15 13:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-07-13 3:17 [PATCH] ARM: perf: Implement perf_arch_fetch_caller_regs Jed Davis
2013-07-15 13:53 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2013-07-20 3:43 ` Jed Davis
2013-07-21 21:39 ` Will Deacon
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=20130715135342.GF10000@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com \
--to=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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 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).