From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
To: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
Cc: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>,
Howard Chu <howardchu95@gmail.com>,
Andrea Righi <andrea.righi@linux.dev>,
peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, mark.rutland@arm.com,
alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com, jolsa@kernel.org,
irogers@google.com, adrian.hunter@intel.com,
kan.liang@linux.intel.com, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, james.clark@linaro.org,
alan.maguire@oracle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] perf trace: Fix support for the new BPF feature in clang 12
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2024 15:33:00 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zxfv3BupKqhi3zGV@x1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZxfbNJ6nKXzoEYVn@google.com>
On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 10:04:52AM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> Hi Arnaldo,
>
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 11:22:15AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 07:06:35PM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > > Hi Arnaldo,
> > >
> > > On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 05:37:38PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 04:58:56PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > > > > So I'm trying adding extra bounds checking, marking the index as
> > > > > volatile, adding compiler barriers, etc, all the fun with the verifier,
> > > > > but got distracted with other stuff, coming back to this now.
> > > >
> > > > > Ok, the following seems to do the trick:
> > > >
> > > > > [acme@dell-per740-01 perf-tools]$ git diff
> > > > > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/augmented_raw_syscalls.bpf.c b/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/augmented_raw_syscalls.bpf.c
> > > > > index 3b30aa74a3ae..ef87a04ff8d0 100644
> > > > > --- a/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/augmented_raw_syscalls.bpf.c
> > > > > +++ b/tools/perf/util/bpf_skel/augmented_raw_syscalls.bpf.c
> > > > > @@ -486,6 +486,7 @@ static int augment_sys_enter(void *ctx, struct syscall_enter_args *args)
> > > > > augmented = true;
> > > > > } else if (size < 0 && size >= -6) { /* buffer */
> > > > > index = -(size + 1);
> > > > > + index &= 7; // To satisfy the bounds checking with the verifier in some kernels
> > > > > aug_size = args->args[index];
> > > > >
> > > > > if (aug_size > TRACE_AUG_MAX_BUF)
> > > > >
> > > > > I'll now test it without Howard's patch to see if it fixes the RHEL8 +
> > > > > clang 17 case.
> > > >
> > > > It works with this one-liner + the simplified patch from Howard and also
> > > > on this other system (RHEL9), as well as with Fedora 40, it would be
> > > > nice if someone could test with clang 16 and report back the version of
> > > > the kernel tested as well as the distro name/release, that way I can try
> > > > to get my hands on such as system and test there as well.
> > > >
> > > > Its all at:
> > > >
> > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/perf/perf-tools.git tmp.perf-tools
> > > >
> > > > This is the current set of patches that when further tested will go to
> > > > Linus for v6.12:
> > > >
> > > > ⬢[acme@toolbox perf-tools]$ git log --oneline torvalds/master..
> > > > ff14baa7a290bf42 (HEAD -> perf-tools, x1/perf-tools, perf-tools/tmp.perf-tools) perf trace augmented_raw_syscalls: Add more checks to pass the verifier
> > > > 46180bec048aad85 perf trace augmented_raw_syscalls: Add extra array index bounds checking to satisfy some BPF verifiers
> > > > 45d1aadac64869a2 perf build: Change the clang check back to 12.0.1
> > >
> > > Wouldn't it be better to have this change after fixing the verifier
> > > issues in the later commits?
> >
> > I'm still testing it, this is a one-liner, so I think that the order in
> > which the patches are applied isn't important. Also Howard's patch (the
> > simplified one) doesn't clash with it.
>
> I'm afraid if it'd break git bisect by allowing old clang versions
> before the fix.
I can reorder the patches if you think it is interesting, but from the
extended set of tests I'm performing on different kernel and clang
version and in x86_64 and arm 64-bit, 32-bit and various distros, I'm
not sure bisection is an option for BPF programs at this stage 8-)
There, did it now it looks like this:
⬢ [acme@toolbox perf-tools]$ git log --oneline torvalds/master..
5d3a1b9ca3b1a059 (HEAD -> perf-tools) perf trace arm32: Fix iteration of syscall ids in syscalltbl->entries
34d2358a24fb5963 perf trace augmented_raw_syscalls: Add more checks to pass the verifier
cdb84c31bd2813de perf trace augmented_raw_syscalls: Add extra array index bounds checking to satisfy some BPF verifiers
e5c1811c590c4312 perf build: Change the clang check back to 12.0.1
39c6a356201ebbd7 perf trace: The return from 'write' isn't a pid
ab8aaab874c4aa37 tools headers UAPI: Sync linux/const.h with the kernel headers
⬢ [acme@toolbox perf-tools]$
Is that what you meant?
Thanks,
- Arnaldo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-22 18:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-11 2:14 [PATCH v2 0/2] perf trace: Fix support for the new BPF feature in clang 12 Howard Chu
2024-10-11 2:14 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] perf build: Change the clang check back to 12.0.1 Howard Chu
2024-10-11 2:14 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] perf trace: Rewrite BPF code to pass the verifier Howard Chu
2024-10-11 8:18 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] perf trace: Fix support for the new BPF feature in clang 12 James Clark
2024-10-15 18:32 ` Namhyung Kim
2024-10-15 19:35 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2024-10-15 19:58 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2024-10-15 20:37 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2024-10-15 21:37 ` Song Liu
[not found] ` <CA+JHD905Xtbb2OYqm3mGbh3C1dKOd-avnC=01=uJfTVEnmA1zQ@mail.gmail.com>
2024-10-15 23:20 ` Song Liu
2024-10-16 2:06 ` Namhyung Kim
2024-10-16 14:22 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2024-10-22 17:04 ` Namhyung Kim
2024-10-22 18:33 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo [this message]
2024-10-22 23:52 ` Namhyung Kim
2024-10-23 14:39 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2024-10-23 21:57 ` Namhyung Kim
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=Zxfv3BupKqhi3zGV@x1 \
--to=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=alan.maguire@oracle.com \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=andrea.righi@linux.dev \
--cc=howardchu95@gmail.com \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=james.clark@linaro.org \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=songliubraving@fb.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox