From: Alan Kao <alankao@andestech.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>, Albert Ou <albert@sifive.com>,
<sw-dev@groups.riscv.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: <greentime@andestech.com>, <zong@andestech.com>
Subject: ftrace: Proposal for an Alternative RecordMcount framework
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 18:04:26 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180227100425.GB20904@andestech.com> (raw)
Hi Steven,
Current recordmcount framework collects the mcount call-sites by grep'ing
the relocation info in each *.o file right after it is compiled, and then
puts them into the __mcount_loc_start array. This works fine in many
architectures, but as mentioned in this riscv/ftrace patch[1], aggressive
relaxing optimizations corrupt the collected offsets, resulting in panics
due to wrong call-site patching in runtime.
Meanwhile, some architectures, such as RISC-V and the on-going nds32, highly
rely on linker relaxation as a link-time optimization to reduce code size
and improve performance. It would be very undesirable to sacrifice them for
ftrace only. But, why can't we collect the call-sites after all of them
are fixed?
We propose an alternative framework, for architectures that cannot
properly record call-sites because of relaxing. Here is the rough
procedure:
1. During the final linking stages, do "objdump vmlinux.o | grep ..." [2]
2. Form the output as an ELF objecj
3. Link the object to __mcount_loc_start symbol
4. Done
With the similar reason as the patch [3], we should mark _mcount to be
a weak symbol to prevent it from being relaxed later.
We would like to know your opinion and comments on this.
Thanks!
Alan Kao
[1] riscv/ftrace dynamic support [patch v4 1/6]:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/2/13/12
[2] This used to not collect some call-sites since their jumps has no
target symbol hint. It becomes possible after the fix in 2.30 release.
See https://github.com/riscv/riscv-binutils-gdb/issues/129 for more
details.
[3] https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/5/14/101
next reply other threads:[~2018-02-27 10:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-27 10:04 Alan Kao [this message]
2018-02-27 21:12 ` ftrace: Proposal for an Alternative RecordMcount framework Steven Rostedt
2018-03-01 2:05 ` Alan Kao
2018-03-07 1:47 ` Alan Kao
2018-03-07 2:00 ` Steven Rostedt
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=20180227100425.GB20904@andestech.com \
--to=alankao@andestech.com \
--cc=albert@sifive.com \
--cc=greentime@andestech.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=palmer@sifive.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sw-dev@groups.riscv.org \
--cc=zong@andestech.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