From: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
Daniel Xu <dxu@dxuuu.xyz>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
kuba@kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, ast@kernel.org,
tglx@linutronix.de, kernel-team@fb.com, yhs@fb.com,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH -tip 3/3] x86/kprobes,orc: Unwind optprobe trampoline correctly
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2021 11:19:50 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210401111950.79b61063e8c87d6a39ec371e@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210401104452.e442afd995d32afecf991301@kernel.org>
On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 10:44:52 +0900
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 10:57:36 -0500
> Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 02:44:56PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_UNWINDER_ORC
> > > +unsigned long recover_optprobe_trampoline(unsigned long addr, unsigned long *sp)
> > > +{
> > > + unsigned long offset, entry, probe_addr;
> > > + struct optimized_kprobe *op;
> > > + struct orc_entry *orc;
> > > +
> > > + entry = find_kprobe_optinsn_slot_entry(addr);
> > > + if (!entry)
> > > + return addr;
> > > +
> > > + offset = addr - entry;
> > > +
> > > + /* Decode arg1 and get the optprobe */
> > > + op = (void *)extract_set_arg1((void *)(entry + TMPL_MOVE_IDX));
> > > + if (!op)
> > > + return addr;
> > > +
> > > + probe_addr = (unsigned long)op->kp.addr;
> > > +
> > > + if (offset < TMPL_END_IDX) {
> > > + orc = orc_find((unsigned long)optprobe_template_func + offset);
> > > + if (!orc || orc->sp_reg != ORC_REG_SP)
> > > + return addr;
> > > + /*
> > > + * Since optprobe trampoline doesn't push caller on the stack,
> > > + * need to decrement 1 stack entry size
> > > + */
> > > + *sp += orc->sp_offset - sizeof(long);
> > > + return probe_addr;
> > > + } else {
> > > + return probe_addr + offset - TMPL_END_IDX;
> > > + }
> > > +}
> > > +#endif
> >
> > Hm, I'd like to avoid intertwining kprobes and ORC like this.
> >
> > ORC unwinds other generated code by assuming the generated code uses a
> > frame pointer. Could we do that here?
>
> No, because the optprobe is not a function call. I considered to make
> it call, but since it has to execute copied instructions directly on
> the trampoline code (without changing stack frame) it is not possible.
>
> > With CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER, unwinding works because SAVE_REGS_STRING has
> > ENCODE_FRAME_POINTER, but that's not going to work for ORC.
>
> Even in that case, the problem is that any interrupt can happen
> before doing ENCODE_FRAME_POINTER. I think this ENCODE_FRAME_POINTER
> in the SAVE_REGS_STRING is for probing right before the target
> function setup a frame pointer.
>
> > Instead of these patches, can we 'push %rbp; mov %rsp, %rbp' at the
> > beginning of the template and 'pop %rbp' at the end?
>
> No, since the trampoline code is not called, it is jumped into.
> This means there is no "return address" in the stack. If we setup
> the frame, there is no return address, thus it might stop there.
> (Moreover, optprobe can copy multiple instructins on trampoline
> buffer, since relative jump consumes 5bytes. where is the "return address"?)
>
> >
> > I guess SAVE_REGS_STRING would need to be smart enough to push the
> > original saved version of %rbp. Of course then that breaks the
> > kretprobe_trampoline() usage, so it may need to be a separate macro.
> >
> > [ Or make the same change to kretprobe_trampoline(). Then the other
> > patch set wouldn't be needed either ;-) ]
>
> Hmm, I don't think it is a good idea which making such change on the
> optimized (hot) path only for the stack tracing. Moreover, that maybe
> not transparent with the stack made by int3.
>
> > Of course the downside is, when you get an interrupt during the frame
> > pointer setup, unwinding is broken. But I think that's acceptable for
> > generated code. We've lived with that limitation for all code, with
> > CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER, for many years.
>
> But above code can fix such issue too. To fix a corner case, non-generic
> code may be required, even it is not so simple.
Hmm, I would like to confirm your policy on ORC unwinder. If it doesn't
care the stacktrace from the interrupt handler, I think your suggestion
is OK. But in that case, from a developer viewpoint, I need to recommend
users to configure CONFIG_UNWIND_FRAME=y when CONFIG_KPROBES=y.
> > Eventually we may want to have a way to register generated code (and the
> > ORC for it).
I see, but the generated code usually does not have a generic way to
handle it. E.g. bpf has a solid entry point, but kretprobe trampoline's
entry point is any "RET", optprobe trampoline's entry point is a jump
which is also generated (patched) ...
Thank you,
--
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-01 2:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-31 5:44 [RFC PATCH -tip 0/3] x86/kprobes,orc: Fix ORC unwinder to unwind stack with optimized probe Masami Hiramatsu
2021-03-31 5:44 ` [RFC PATCH -tip 1/3] x86/kprobes: Add ORC information to optprobe template Masami Hiramatsu
2021-03-31 5:44 ` [RFC PATCH -tip 2/3] kprobes: Add functions to find instruction buffer entry address Masami Hiramatsu
2021-03-31 5:44 ` [RFC PATCH -tip 3/3] x86/kprobes,orc: Unwind optprobe trampoline correctly Masami Hiramatsu
2021-03-31 15:57 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2021-04-01 1:44 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2021-04-01 2:19 ` Masami Hiramatsu [this message]
2021-04-01 1:54 ` Masami Hiramatsu
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=20210401111950.79b61063e8c87d6a39ec371e@kernel.org \
--to=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dxu@dxuuu.xyz \
--cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=yhs@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