From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
To: Chen Zhongjin <chenzhongjin@huawei.com>
Cc: "Madhavan T. Venkataraman" <madvenka@linux.microsoft.com>,
mark.rutland@arm.com, broonie@kernel.org, ardb@kernel.org,
nobuta.keiya@fujitsu.com, sjitindarsingh@gmail.com,
catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, jmorris@namei.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
live-patching@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/9] arm64: livepatch: Use DWARF Call Frame Information for frame pointer validation
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2022 17:56:09 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220416005609.3znhltjlhpg475ff@treble> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <35c99466-9024-a7fd-9632-5d21b3e558f7@huawei.com>
On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 04:32:22PM +0800, Chen Zhongjin wrote:
> By the way, I was thinking about a corner case, because arm64 CALL
> instruction won't push LR onto stack atomically as x86. Before push LR, FP
> to save frame there still can be some instructions such as bti, paciasp. If
> an irq happens here, the stack frame is not constructed so the FP unwinder
> will omit this function and provides a wrong stack trace to livepatch.
>
> It's just a guess and I have not built the test case. But I think it's a
> defect on arm64 that FP unwinder can't work properly on prologue and
> epilogue. Do you have any idea about this?
x86 has similar issues with frame pointers, if for example preemption or
page fault exception occurs in a leaf function, or in a function
prologue or epilogue, before or after the frame pointer setup.
This issue is solved by the "reliable" unwinder which detects
irqs/exceptions on the stack and reports the stack as unreliable.
--
Josh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-16 2:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 75+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <95691cae4f4504f33d0fc9075541b1e7deefe96f>
2022-01-17 14:55 ` [PATCH v13 00/11] arm64: Reorganize the unwinder and implement stack trace reliability checks madvenka
2022-01-17 14:55 ` [PATCH v13 01/11] arm64: Remove NULL task check from unwind_frame() madvenka
2022-01-17 14:55 ` [PATCH v13 02/11] arm64: Rename unwinder functions madvenka
2022-01-17 14:56 ` [PATCH v13 03/11] arm64: Rename stackframe to unwind_state madvenka
2022-01-17 14:56 ` [PATCH v13 04/11] arm64: Split unwind_init() madvenka
2022-02-02 18:44 ` Mark Brown
2022-02-03 0:26 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-02-03 0:39 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-02-03 11:29 ` Mark Brown
2022-02-15 13:07 ` Mark Rutland
2022-02-15 18:04 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-01-17 14:56 ` [PATCH v13 05/11] arm64: Copy the task argument to unwind_state madvenka
2022-02-02 18:45 ` Mark Brown
2022-02-15 13:22 ` Mark Rutland
2022-02-22 16:53 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-01-17 14:56 ` [PATCH v13 06/11] arm64: Use stack_trace_consume_fn and rename args to unwind() madvenka
2022-02-02 18:46 ` Mark Brown
2022-02-03 0:34 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-02-03 11:30 ` Mark Brown
2022-02-03 14:45 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-02-15 13:39 ` Mark Rutland
2022-02-15 18:12 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-03-07 16:51 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-03-07 17:01 ` Mark Brown
2022-03-08 22:00 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-03-09 11:47 ` Mark Brown
2022-03-09 15:34 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-03-10 8:33 ` Miroslav Benes
2022-03-10 12:36 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-03-16 3:43 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2022-04-08 14:44 ` Mark Rutland
2022-04-08 17:58 ` Mark Rutland
2022-04-10 17:42 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-04-10 17:33 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-04-10 17:45 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-01-17 14:56 ` [PATCH v13 07/11] arm64: Make the unwind loop in unwind() similar to other architectures madvenka
2022-01-17 14:56 ` [PATCH v13 08/11] arm64: Introduce stack trace reliability checks in the unwinder madvenka
2022-01-17 14:56 ` [PATCH v13 09/11] arm64: Create a list of SYM_CODE functions, check return PC against list madvenka
2022-01-17 14:56 ` [PATCH v13 10/11] arm64: Introduce arch_stack_walk_reliable() madvenka
2022-01-17 14:56 ` [PATCH v13 11/11] arm64: Select HAVE_RELIABLE_STACKTRACE madvenka
2022-01-25 5:21 ` nobuta.keiya
2022-01-25 13:43 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-01-26 10:20 ` nobuta.keiya
2022-01-26 17:14 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-01-27 1:13 ` nobuta.keiya
2022-01-26 17:16 ` Mark Brown
2022-04-07 20:25 ` [RFC PATCH v1 0/9] arm64: livepatch: Use DWARF Call Frame Information for frame pointer validation madvenka
2022-04-07 20:25 ` [RFC PATCH v1 1/9] objtool: Parse DWARF Call Frame Information in object files madvenka
2022-04-07 20:25 ` [RFC PATCH v1 2/9] objtool: Generate DWARF rules and place them in a special section madvenka
2022-04-07 20:25 ` [RFC PATCH v1 3/9] dwarf: Build the kernel with DWARF information madvenka
2022-04-07 20:25 ` [RFC PATCH v1 4/9] dwarf: Implement DWARF rule processing in the kernel madvenka
2022-04-07 20:25 ` [RFC PATCH v1 5/9] dwarf: Implement DWARF support for modules madvenka
2022-04-07 20:25 ` [RFC PATCH v1 6/9] arm64: unwinder: Add a reliability check in the unwinder based on DWARF CFI madvenka
2022-04-07 20:25 ` [RFC PATCH v1 7/9] arm64: dwarf: Implement unwind hints madvenka
2022-04-07 20:25 ` [RFC PATCH v1 8/9] dwarf: Miscellaneous changes required for enabling livepatch madvenka
2022-04-07 20:25 ` [RFC PATCH v1 9/9] dwarf: Enable livepatch for ARM64 madvenka
2022-04-08 0:21 ` [RFC PATCH v1 0/9] arm64: livepatch: Use DWARF Call Frame Information for frame pointer validation Josh Poimboeuf
2022-04-08 11:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-04-11 17:26 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-04-11 17:18 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-04-12 8:32 ` Chen Zhongjin
2022-04-16 0:56 ` Josh Poimboeuf [this message]
2022-04-18 12:28 ` Chen Zhongjin
2022-04-18 16:11 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2022-04-18 18:38 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
[not found] ` <844b3ede-eddb-cbe6-80e0-3529e2da2eb6@huawei.com>
2022-04-12 17:27 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-04-16 1:07 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2022-04-14 14:11 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-04-08 10:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-04-08 11:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-04-08 14:34 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2022-04-10 17:47 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-04-11 16:34 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2022-04-08 12:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-04-11 17:35 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
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=20220416005609.3znhltjlhpg475ff@treble \
--to=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=chenzhongjin@huawei.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=live-patching@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=madvenka@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=nobuta.keiya@fujitsu.com \
--cc=sjitindarsingh@gmail.com \
--cc=will@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 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).