linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	acme@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/8] kprobes: Fix kallsyms lookup across powerpc ABIv1 and ABIv2
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2014 15:56:34 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141210102634.GA16045@naverao1-tp.in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1418204242.9279.4.camel@ellerman.id.au>

On 2014/12/10 08:37PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-12-09 at 23:03 +0530, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
> > Currently, all non-dot symbols are being treated as function descriptors
> > in ABIv1. This is incorrect and is resulting in perf probe not working:
> 
> I don't understand that first sentence. With ABIv1 non-dot symbols *are*
> function descriptors?

Not always. '_text' is an example of a symbol that is not a function 
descriptor. However, most functions have a dot variant constituting the 
actual entry point and a non-dot variant constituting the function 
descriptor.

> 
> >   # perf probe do_fork
> >   Added new event:
> >   Failed to write event: Invalid argument
> >     Error: Failed to add events.
> >   # dmesg | tail -1
> >   [192268.073063] Could not insert probe at _text+768432: -22
> > 
> > _text is being resolved incorrectly and is resulting in the above error.
> > Fix this by changing how we lookup symbol addresses on ppc64. We first
> > check for the dot variant of a symbol and look at the non-dot variant
> > only if that fails. In this manner, we avoid having to look at the
> > function descriptor.
> 
> I'm not clear that ppc_local_function_entry() makes sense. On ABIv2 you return
> the local entry point, which is fine. But on ABIv1 you just return the
> unmodified address, which will be the descriptor if you actually passed it a
> function pointer. I think you're assuming that you're passed the text address,
> but if that's the case the function is badly named at least.
> 
> I also don't understand why we need to ever guess which ABI we're using. We
> know which ABI we're built with, so there should be no guess work required.
> 
> So at the very least this needs much more explanation.
> 
> But to be honest I'm not clear why it even needs a kernel change, don't we just
> need perf to understand dot symbols?

The problem in this case is in the kernel. perf probe is now basing all 
probe addresses on _text and writes, for example, "p:probe/do_fork 
_text+768432" to /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/kprobe_events.

This ends up in kprobe_lookup_name() for resolving address of _text, 
which invokes ppc_function_entry(), which ends up thinking _text is a 
function descriptor.

Even though we know we are compiled for ABIv1, there is no easy way to 
identify if a given symbol is the actual entry point or if it is a 
function descriptor. To address this, my approach is to always check for 
a dot symbol first and if that exists, we know we have the actual 
function entry. If not, we know this isn't a function descriptor (since 
there is no related dot symbol).

I agree that the function is named badly though. The real problem is 
that kprobe_lookup_name is a macro and I can't have a #ifdef to call 
ppc_function_entry() only for ABIv2.

Thoughts? Suggestions?

Thanks,
Naveen

  reply	other threads:[~2014-12-10 10:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-12-09 17:33 [RFC PATCH 0/8] Fix perf probe issues on powerpc Naveen N. Rao
2014-12-09 17:33 ` [RFC PATCH 1/8] kprobes: Fix kallsyms lookup across powerpc ABIv1 and ABIv2 Naveen N. Rao
2014-12-10  9:37   ` Michael Ellerman
2014-12-10 10:26     ` Naveen N. Rao [this message]
2014-12-09 17:34 ` [RFC PATCH 2/8] perf probe powerpc: Fix symbol fixup issues due to ELF type Naveen N. Rao
2014-12-09 21:07   ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2014-12-10  9:35     ` Naveen N. Rao
2014-12-10  9:50   ` Michael Ellerman
2014-12-10 10:41     ` Naveen N. Rao
2014-12-09 17:34 ` [RFC PATCH 3/8] perf probe: Improve detection of file/function name in the probe pattern Naveen N. Rao
2014-12-10 10:00   ` Michael Ellerman
2014-12-10 10:59     ` Naveen N. Rao
2014-12-10 11:12       ` Michael Ellerman
2014-12-09 17:34 ` [RFC PATCH 4/8] perf probe powerpc: Handle powerpc dot symbols Naveen N. Rao
2014-12-10 10:01   ` Michael Ellerman
2014-12-09 17:34 ` [RFC PATCH 5/8] perf probe powerpc: Allow matching against " Naveen N. Rao
2014-12-10 10:03   ` Michael Ellerman
2014-12-09 17:34 ` [RFC PATCH 6/8] perf tools powerpc: Fix PPC64 ELF ABIv2 symbol decoding Naveen N. Rao
2014-12-10 10:13   ` Michael Ellerman
2014-12-10 11:21     ` Naveen N. Rao
2014-12-09 17:34 ` [RFC PATCH 7/8] perf probe powerpc: Use DWARF info only if necessary Naveen N. Rao
2014-12-10 10:17   ` Michael Ellerman
2014-12-10 11:48     ` Naveen N. Rao
2014-12-09 17:34 ` [RFC PATCH 8/8] perf probe powerpc: Fixup function entry if using kallsyms lookup Naveen N. Rao
2014-12-09 21:14   ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2014-12-10  4:11     ` Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
2014-12-10  4:12 ` [RFC PATCH 0/8] Fix perf probe issues on powerpc Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
2015-01-21 12:51 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2015-01-21 15:33   ` Naveen N. Rao

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=20141210102634.GA16045@naverao1-tp.in.ibm.com \
    --to=naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    /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).