From: james.morse@arm.com (James Morse)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2] arm64: fix unwind_frame() for filtered out fn for function graph tracing
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 10:54:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <59B7AED4.1070106@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3c175a7a1f7c2e08098f6d5e84dc247ce94846d2.1504244801.git.panand@redhat.com>
Hi Pratyush,
On 01/09/17 06:48, Pratyush Anand wrote:
> do_task_stat() calls get_wchan(), which further does unbind_frame().
> unbind_frame() restores frame->pc to original value in case function
> graph tracer has modified a return address (LR) in a stack frame to hook
> a function return. However, if function graph tracer has hit a filtered
> function, then we can't unwind it as ftrace_push_return_trace() has
> biased the index(frame->graph) with a 'huge negative'
> offset(-FTRACE_NOTRACE_DEPTH).
>
> Moreover, arm64 stack walker defines index(frame->graph) as unsigned
> int, which can not compare a -ve number.
>
> Similar problem we can have with calling of walk_stackframe() from
> save_stack_trace_tsk() or dump_backtrace().
>
> This patch fixes unwind_frame() to test the index for -ve value and
> restore index accordingly before we can restore frame->pc.
I've just spotted arm64's profile_pc, which does this:
>From arch/arm64/kernel/time.c:profile_pc():
> #ifdef CONFIG_FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER
> frame.graph = -1; /* no task info */
> #endif
Is this another elaborate way of hitting this problem?
I guess the options are skip any return-address restore in the unwinder if
frame.graph is -1. (and profile_pc may have a bug here). Or, put
current->curr_ret_stack in there.
profile_pc() always passes tsk=NULL, so the unwinder assumes its current...
kernel/profile.c pulls the pt_regs from a per-cpu irq_regs variable, that is
updated by handle_IPI ... so it looks like this should always be current...
Thanks,
James
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c
> index 09d37d66b630..4c47147d0554 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c
> @@ -75,6 +75,9 @@ int notrace unwind_frame(struct task_struct *tsk, struct stackframe *frame)
> #ifdef CONFIG_FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER
> if (tsk->ret_stack &&
> (frame->pc == (unsigned long)return_to_handler)) {
> + if (frame->graph < 0)
> + frame->graph += FTRACE_NOTRACE_DEPTH;
> +
> /*
> * This is a case where function graph tracer has
> * modified a return address (LR) in a stack frame
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-09-12 9:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-09-01 5:48 [PATCH v2] arm64: fix unwind_frame() for filtered out fn for function graph tracing Pratyush Anand
2017-09-12 9:54 ` James Morse [this message]
2017-09-13 2:42 ` Will Deacon
2017-09-13 4:59 ` Pratyush Anand
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=59B7AED4.1070106@arm.com \
--to=james.morse@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).