* [PATCH] riscv: fgraph: Fix stack layout to match __arch_ftrace_regs argument of ftrace_return_to_handler
@ 2025-03-11 13:22 Pu Lehui
2025-03-11 14:14 ` Alexandre Ghiti
` (3 more replies)
0 siblings, 4 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Pu Lehui @ 2025-03-11 13:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-riscv, linux-kernel
Cc: Palmer Dabbelt, Alexandre Ghiti, Masami Hiramatsu (Google),
Steven Rostedt (Google), Naresh Kamboju, Pu Lehui
From: Pu Lehui <pulehui@huawei.com>
Naresh Kamboju reported a "Bad frame pointer" kernel warning while
running LTP trace ftrace_stress_test.sh in riscv. We can reproduce the
same issue with the following command:
```
$ cd /sys/kernel/debug/tracing
$ echo 'f:myprobe do_nanosleep%return args1=$retval' > dynamic_events
$ echo 1 > events/fprobes/enable
$ echo 1 > tracing_on
$ sleep 1
```
And we can get the following kernel warning:
[ 127.692888] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[ 127.693755] Bad frame pointer: expected ff2000000065be50, received ba34c141e9594000
[ 127.693755] from func do_nanosleep return to ffffffff800ccb16
[ 127.698699] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 129 at kernel/trace/fgraph.c:755 ftrace_return_to_handler+0x1b2/0x1be
[ 127.699894] Modules linked in:
[ 127.700908] CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 129 Comm: sleep Not tainted 6.14.0-rc3-g0ab191c74642 #32
[ 127.701453] Hardware name: riscv-virtio,qemu (DT)
[ 127.701859] epc : ftrace_return_to_handler+0x1b2/0x1be
[ 127.702032] ra : ftrace_return_to_handler+0x1b2/0x1be
[ 127.702151] epc : ffffffff8013b5e0 ra : ffffffff8013b5e0 sp : ff2000000065bd10
[ 127.702221] gp : ffffffff819c12f8 tp : ff60000080853100 t0 : 6e00000000000000
[ 127.702284] t1 : 0000000000000020 t2 : 6e7566206d6f7266 s0 : ff2000000065bd80
[ 127.702346] s1 : ff60000081262000 a0 : 000000000000007b a1 : ffffffff81894f20
[ 127.702408] a2 : 0000000000000010 a3 : fffffffffffffffe a4 : 0000000000000000
[ 127.702470] a5 : 0000000000000000 a6 : 0000000000000008 a7 : 0000000000000038
[ 127.702530] s2 : ba34c141e9594000 s3 : 0000000000000000 s4 : ff2000000065bdd0
[ 127.702591] s5 : 00007fff8adcf400 s6 : 000055556dc1d8c0 s7 : 0000000000000068
[ 127.702651] s8 : 00007fff8adf5d10 s9 : 000000000000006d s10: 0000000000000001
[ 127.702710] s11: 00005555737377c8 t3 : ffffffff819d899e t4 : ffffffff819d899e
[ 127.702769] t5 : ffffffff819d89a0 t6 : ff2000000065bb18
[ 127.702826] status: 0000000200000120 badaddr: 0000000000000000 cause: 0000000000000003
[ 127.703292] [<ffffffff8013b5e0>] ftrace_return_to_handler+0x1b2/0x1be
[ 127.703760] [<ffffffff80017bce>] return_to_handler+0x16/0x26
[ 127.704009] [<ffffffff80017bb8>] return_to_handler+0x0/0x26
[ 127.704057] [<ffffffff800d3352>] common_nsleep+0x42/0x54
[ 127.704117] [<ffffffff800d44a2>] __riscv_sys_clock_nanosleep+0xba/0x10a
[ 127.704176] [<ffffffff80901c56>] do_trap_ecall_u+0x188/0x218
[ 127.704295] [<ffffffff8090cc3e>] handle_exception+0x14a/0x156
[ 127.705436] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---
The reason is that the stack layout for constructing argument for the
ftrace_return_to_handler in the return_to_handler does not match the
__arch_ftrace_regs structure of riscv, leading to unexpected results.
Fixes: a3ed4157b7d8 ("fgraph: Replace fgraph_ret_regs with ftrace_regs")
Reported-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@linaro.org>
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/CA+G9fYvp_oAxeDFj88Tk2rfEZ7jtYKAKSwfYS66=57Db9TBdyA@mail.gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Pu Lehui <pulehui@huawei.com>
---
arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S | 24 +++++++++++-------------
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S b/arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S
index 068168046e0e..da4a4000e57e 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S
+++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S
@@ -12,8 +12,6 @@
#include <asm/asm-offsets.h>
#include <asm/ftrace.h>
-#define ABI_SIZE_ON_STACK 80
-
.text
.macro SAVE_ABI_STATE
@@ -28,12 +26,12 @@
* register if a0 was not saved.
*/
.macro SAVE_RET_ABI_STATE
- addi sp, sp, -ABI_SIZE_ON_STACK
- REG_S ra, 1*SZREG(sp)
- REG_S s0, 8*SZREG(sp)
- REG_S a0, 10*SZREG(sp)
- REG_S a1, 11*SZREG(sp)
- addi s0, sp, ABI_SIZE_ON_STACK
+ addi sp, sp, -FREGS_SIZE_ON_STACK
+ REG_S ra, FREGS_RA(sp)
+ REG_S s0, FREGS_S0(sp)
+ REG_S a0, FREGS_A0(sp)
+ REG_S a1, FREGS_A1(sp)
+ addi s0, sp, FREGS_SIZE_ON_STACK
.endm
.macro RESTORE_ABI_STATE
@@ -43,11 +41,11 @@
.endm
.macro RESTORE_RET_ABI_STATE
- REG_L ra, 1*SZREG(sp)
- REG_L s0, 8*SZREG(sp)
- REG_L a0, 10*SZREG(sp)
- REG_L a1, 11*SZREG(sp)
- addi sp, sp, ABI_SIZE_ON_STACK
+ REG_L ra, FREGS_RA(sp)
+ REG_L s0, FREGS_S0(sp)
+ REG_L a0, FREGS_A0(sp)
+ REG_L a1, FREGS_A1(sp)
+ addi sp, sp, FREGS_SIZE_ON_STACK
.endm
SYM_TYPED_FUNC_START(ftrace_stub)
--
2.34.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] riscv: fgraph: Fix stack layout to match __arch_ftrace_regs argument of ftrace_return_to_handler
2025-03-11 13:22 [PATCH] riscv: fgraph: Fix stack layout to match __arch_ftrace_regs argument of ftrace_return_to_handler Pu Lehui
@ 2025-03-11 14:14 ` Alexandre Ghiti
2025-03-12 19:35 ` Björn Töpel
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Alexandre Ghiti @ 2025-03-11 14:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pu Lehui, linux-riscv, linux-kernel
Cc: Palmer Dabbelt, Masami Hiramatsu (Google),
Steven Rostedt (Google), Naresh Kamboju, Pu Lehui,
Björn Töpel
Hi Pu,
Thanks for working on this, we were talking about this issue with Björn
this morning!
On 11/03/2025 14:22, Pu Lehui wrote:
> From: Pu Lehui <pulehui@huawei.com>
>
> Naresh Kamboju reported a "Bad frame pointer" kernel warning while
> running LTP trace ftrace_stress_test.sh in riscv. We can reproduce the
> same issue with the following command:
>
> ```
> $ cd /sys/kernel/debug/tracing
> $ echo 'f:myprobe do_nanosleep%return args1=$retval' > dynamic_events
> $ echo 1 > events/fprobes/enable
> $ echo 1 > tracing_on
> $ sleep 1
> ```
>
> And we can get the following kernel warning:
>
> [ 127.692888] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> [ 127.693755] Bad frame pointer: expected ff2000000065be50, received ba34c141e9594000
> [ 127.693755] from func do_nanosleep return to ffffffff800ccb16
> [ 127.698699] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 129 at kernel/trace/fgraph.c:755 ftrace_return_to_handler+0x1b2/0x1be
> [ 127.699894] Modules linked in:
> [ 127.700908] CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 129 Comm: sleep Not tainted 6.14.0-rc3-g0ab191c74642 #32
> [ 127.701453] Hardware name: riscv-virtio,qemu (DT)
> [ 127.701859] epc : ftrace_return_to_handler+0x1b2/0x1be
> [ 127.702032] ra : ftrace_return_to_handler+0x1b2/0x1be
> [ 127.702151] epc : ffffffff8013b5e0 ra : ffffffff8013b5e0 sp : ff2000000065bd10
> [ 127.702221] gp : ffffffff819c12f8 tp : ff60000080853100 t0 : 6e00000000000000
> [ 127.702284] t1 : 0000000000000020 t2 : 6e7566206d6f7266 s0 : ff2000000065bd80
> [ 127.702346] s1 : ff60000081262000 a0 : 000000000000007b a1 : ffffffff81894f20
> [ 127.702408] a2 : 0000000000000010 a3 : fffffffffffffffe a4 : 0000000000000000
> [ 127.702470] a5 : 0000000000000000 a6 : 0000000000000008 a7 : 0000000000000038
> [ 127.702530] s2 : ba34c141e9594000 s3 : 0000000000000000 s4 : ff2000000065bdd0
> [ 127.702591] s5 : 00007fff8adcf400 s6 : 000055556dc1d8c0 s7 : 0000000000000068
> [ 127.702651] s8 : 00007fff8adf5d10 s9 : 000000000000006d s10: 0000000000000001
> [ 127.702710] s11: 00005555737377c8 t3 : ffffffff819d899e t4 : ffffffff819d899e
> [ 127.702769] t5 : ffffffff819d89a0 t6 : ff2000000065bb18
> [ 127.702826] status: 0000000200000120 badaddr: 0000000000000000 cause: 0000000000000003
> [ 127.703292] [<ffffffff8013b5e0>] ftrace_return_to_handler+0x1b2/0x1be
> [ 127.703760] [<ffffffff80017bce>] return_to_handler+0x16/0x26
> [ 127.704009] [<ffffffff80017bb8>] return_to_handler+0x0/0x26
> [ 127.704057] [<ffffffff800d3352>] common_nsleep+0x42/0x54
> [ 127.704117] [<ffffffff800d44a2>] __riscv_sys_clock_nanosleep+0xba/0x10a
> [ 127.704176] [<ffffffff80901c56>] do_trap_ecall_u+0x188/0x218
> [ 127.704295] [<ffffffff8090cc3e>] handle_exception+0x14a/0x156
> [ 127.705436] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---
>
> The reason is that the stack layout for constructing argument for the
> ftrace_return_to_handler in the return_to_handler does not match the
> __arch_ftrace_regs structure of riscv, leading to unexpected results.
>
> Fixes: a3ed4157b7d8 ("fgraph: Replace fgraph_ret_regs with ftrace_regs")
> Reported-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@linaro.org>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/CA+G9fYvp_oAxeDFj88Tk2rfEZ7jtYKAKSwfYS66=57Db9TBdyA@mail.gmail.com
> Signed-off-by: Pu Lehui <pulehui@huawei.com>
> ---
> arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S | 24 +++++++++++-------------
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S b/arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S
> index 068168046e0e..da4a4000e57e 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S
> @@ -12,8 +12,6 @@
> #include <asm/asm-offsets.h>
> #include <asm/ftrace.h>
>
> -#define ABI_SIZE_ON_STACK 80
> -
> .text
>
> .macro SAVE_ABI_STATE
> @@ -28,12 +26,12 @@
> * register if a0 was not saved.
> */
> .macro SAVE_RET_ABI_STATE
> - addi sp, sp, -ABI_SIZE_ON_STACK
> - REG_S ra, 1*SZREG(sp)
> - REG_S s0, 8*SZREG(sp)
> - REG_S a0, 10*SZREG(sp)
> - REG_S a1, 11*SZREG(sp)
> - addi s0, sp, ABI_SIZE_ON_STACK
> + addi sp, sp, -FREGS_SIZE_ON_STACK
> + REG_S ra, FREGS_RA(sp)
> + REG_S s0, FREGS_S0(sp)
> + REG_S a0, FREGS_A0(sp)
> + REG_S a1, FREGS_A1(sp)
> + addi s0, sp, FREGS_SIZE_ON_STACK
> .endm
>
> .macro RESTORE_ABI_STATE
> @@ -43,11 +41,11 @@
> .endm
>
> .macro RESTORE_RET_ABI_STATE
> - REG_L ra, 1*SZREG(sp)
> - REG_L s0, 8*SZREG(sp)
> - REG_L a0, 10*SZREG(sp)
> - REG_L a1, 11*SZREG(sp)
> - addi sp, sp, ABI_SIZE_ON_STACK
> + REG_L ra, FREGS_RA(sp)
> + REG_L s0, FREGS_S0(sp)
> + REG_L a0, FREGS_A0(sp)
> + REG_L a1, FREGS_A1(sp)
> + addi sp, sp, FREGS_SIZE_ON_STACK
> .endm
>
> SYM_TYPED_FUNC_START(ftrace_stub)
It looks good to me, so:
Reviewed-by: Alexandre Ghiti <alexghiti@rivosinc.com>
Thanks,
Alex
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] riscv: fgraph: Fix stack layout to match __arch_ftrace_regs argument of ftrace_return_to_handler
2025-03-11 13:22 [PATCH] riscv: fgraph: Fix stack layout to match __arch_ftrace_regs argument of ftrace_return_to_handler Pu Lehui
2025-03-11 14:14 ` Alexandre Ghiti
@ 2025-03-12 19:35 ` Björn Töpel
2025-03-16 1:16 ` kernel test robot
2025-03-27 3:24 ` patchwork-bot+linux-riscv
3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Björn Töpel @ 2025-03-12 19:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pu Lehui, linux-riscv, linux-kernel
Cc: Palmer Dabbelt, Alexandre Ghiti, Masami Hiramatsu (Google),
Steven Rostedt (Google), Naresh Kamboju, Pu Lehui
Pu Lehui <pulehui@huaweicloud.com> writes:
> From: Pu Lehui <pulehui@huawei.com>
>
> Naresh Kamboju reported a "Bad frame pointer" kernel warning while
> running LTP trace ftrace_stress_test.sh in riscv. We can reproduce the
> same issue with the following command:
>
> ```
> $ cd /sys/kernel/debug/tracing
> $ echo 'f:myprobe do_nanosleep%return args1=$retval' > dynamic_events
> $ echo 1 > events/fprobes/enable
> $ echo 1 > tracing_on
> $ sleep 1
> ```
>
> And we can get the following kernel warning:
>
> [ 127.692888] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> [ 127.693755] Bad frame pointer: expected ff2000000065be50, received ba34c141e9594000
> [ 127.693755] from func do_nanosleep return to ffffffff800ccb16
> [ 127.698699] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 129 at kernel/trace/fgraph.c:755 ftrace_return_to_handler+0x1b2/0x1be
> [ 127.699894] Modules linked in:
> [ 127.700908] CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 129 Comm: sleep Not tainted 6.14.0-rc3-g0ab191c74642 #32
> [ 127.701453] Hardware name: riscv-virtio,qemu (DT)
> [ 127.701859] epc : ftrace_return_to_handler+0x1b2/0x1be
> [ 127.702032] ra : ftrace_return_to_handler+0x1b2/0x1be
> [ 127.702151] epc : ffffffff8013b5e0 ra : ffffffff8013b5e0 sp : ff2000000065bd10
> [ 127.702221] gp : ffffffff819c12f8 tp : ff60000080853100 t0 : 6e00000000000000
> [ 127.702284] t1 : 0000000000000020 t2 : 6e7566206d6f7266 s0 : ff2000000065bd80
> [ 127.702346] s1 : ff60000081262000 a0 : 000000000000007b a1 : ffffffff81894f20
> [ 127.702408] a2 : 0000000000000010 a3 : fffffffffffffffe a4 : 0000000000000000
> [ 127.702470] a5 : 0000000000000000 a6 : 0000000000000008 a7 : 0000000000000038
> [ 127.702530] s2 : ba34c141e9594000 s3 : 0000000000000000 s4 : ff2000000065bdd0
> [ 127.702591] s5 : 00007fff8adcf400 s6 : 000055556dc1d8c0 s7 : 0000000000000068
> [ 127.702651] s8 : 00007fff8adf5d10 s9 : 000000000000006d s10: 0000000000000001
> [ 127.702710] s11: 00005555737377c8 t3 : ffffffff819d899e t4 : ffffffff819d899e
> [ 127.702769] t5 : ffffffff819d89a0 t6 : ff2000000065bb18
> [ 127.702826] status: 0000000200000120 badaddr: 0000000000000000 cause: 0000000000000003
> [ 127.703292] [<ffffffff8013b5e0>] ftrace_return_to_handler+0x1b2/0x1be
> [ 127.703760] [<ffffffff80017bce>] return_to_handler+0x16/0x26
> [ 127.704009] [<ffffffff80017bb8>] return_to_handler+0x0/0x26
> [ 127.704057] [<ffffffff800d3352>] common_nsleep+0x42/0x54
> [ 127.704117] [<ffffffff800d44a2>] __riscv_sys_clock_nanosleep+0xba/0x10a
> [ 127.704176] [<ffffffff80901c56>] do_trap_ecall_u+0x188/0x218
> [ 127.704295] [<ffffffff8090cc3e>] handle_exception+0x14a/0x156
> [ 127.705436] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---
>
> The reason is that the stack layout for constructing argument for the
> ftrace_return_to_handler in the return_to_handler does not match the
> __arch_ftrace_regs structure of riscv, leading to unexpected results.
>
> Fixes: a3ed4157b7d8 ("fgraph: Replace fgraph_ret_regs with ftrace_regs")
> Reported-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@linaro.org>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/CA+G9fYvp_oAxeDFj88Tk2rfEZ7jtYKAKSwfYS66=57Db9TBdyA@mail.gmail.com
> Signed-off-by: Pu Lehui <pulehui@huawei.com>
With this patch, I get (from ftrace startup tests):
Testing tracer function_graph: PASSED
instead of the splat above! Thanks!
Tested-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn@rivosinc.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] riscv: fgraph: Fix stack layout to match __arch_ftrace_regs argument of ftrace_return_to_handler
2025-03-11 13:22 [PATCH] riscv: fgraph: Fix stack layout to match __arch_ftrace_regs argument of ftrace_return_to_handler Pu Lehui
2025-03-11 14:14 ` Alexandre Ghiti
2025-03-12 19:35 ` Björn Töpel
@ 2025-03-16 1:16 ` kernel test robot
2025-03-17 3:06 ` Pu Lehui
2025-03-27 3:24 ` patchwork-bot+linux-riscv
3 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: kernel test robot @ 2025-03-16 1:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pu Lehui, linux-riscv, linux-kernel
Cc: llvm, oe-kbuild-all, Palmer Dabbelt, Alexandre Ghiti,
Masami Hiramatsu (Google), Steven Rostedt (Google),
Naresh Kamboju, Pu Lehui
Hi Pu,
kernel test robot noticed the following build errors:
[auto build test ERROR on linus/master]
[also build test ERROR on v6.14-rc6 next-20250314]
[If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information]
url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Pu-Lehui/riscv-fgraph-Fix-stack-layout-to-match-__arch_ftrace_regs-argument-of-ftrace_return_to_handler/20250311-212440
base: linus/master
patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250311132243.2178271-1-pulehui%40huaweicloud.com
patch subject: [PATCH] riscv: fgraph: Fix stack layout to match __arch_ftrace_regs argument of ftrace_return_to_handler
config: riscv-randconfig-001-20250316 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250316/202503160820.dvqMpH0g-lkp@intel.com/config)
compiler: clang version 21.0.0git (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project 87916f8c32ebd8e284091db9b70339df57fd1e90)
reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250316/202503160820.dvqMpH0g-lkp@intel.com/reproduce)
If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
| Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
| Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202503160820.dvqMpH0g-lkp@intel.com/
All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
>> <instantiation>:1:14: error: operand must be a symbol with %lo/%pcrel_lo/%tprel_lo modifier or an integer in the range [-2048, 2047]
addi sp, sp, -FREGS_SIZE_ON_STACK
^
arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S:73:2: note: while in macro instantiation
SAVE_RET_ABI_STATE
^
>> <instantiation>:2:17: error: unexpected token
sw ra, FREGS_RA(sp)
^
arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S:73:2: note: while in macro instantiation
SAVE_RET_ABI_STATE
^
<instantiation>:3:17: error: unexpected token
sw s0, FREGS_S0(sp)
^
arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S:73:2: note: while in macro instantiation
SAVE_RET_ABI_STATE
^
<instantiation>:4:17: error: unexpected token
sw a0, FREGS_A0(sp)
^
arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S:73:2: note: while in macro instantiation
SAVE_RET_ABI_STATE
^
<instantiation>:5:17: error: unexpected token
sw a1, FREGS_A1(sp)
^
arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S:73:2: note: while in macro instantiation
SAVE_RET_ABI_STATE
^
<instantiation>:6:15: error: operand must be a symbol with %lo/%pcrel_lo/%tprel_lo modifier or an integer in the range [-2048, 2047]
addi s0, sp, FREGS_SIZE_ON_STACK
^
arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S:73:2: note: while in macro instantiation
SAVE_RET_ABI_STATE
^
<instantiation>:1:16: error: unexpected token
lw ra, FREGS_RA(sp)
^
arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S:77:2: note: while in macro instantiation
RESTORE_RET_ABI_STATE
^
>> <instantiation>:2:17: error: unexpected token
lw s0, FREGS_S0(sp)
^
arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S:77:2: note: while in macro instantiation
RESTORE_RET_ABI_STATE
^
<instantiation>:3:17: error: unexpected token
lw a0, FREGS_A0(sp)
^
arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S:77:2: note: while in macro instantiation
RESTORE_RET_ABI_STATE
^
<instantiation>:4:17: error: unexpected token
lw a1, FREGS_A1(sp)
^
arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S:77:2: note: while in macro instantiation
RESTORE_RET_ABI_STATE
^
<instantiation>:5:15: error: operand must be a symbol with %lo/%pcrel_lo/%tprel_lo modifier or an integer in the range [-2048, 2047]
addi sp, sp, FREGS_SIZE_ON_STACK
^
arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S:77:2: note: while in macro instantiation
RESTORE_RET_ABI_STATE
^
--
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] riscv: fgraph: Fix stack layout to match __arch_ftrace_regs argument of ftrace_return_to_handler
2025-03-16 1:16 ` kernel test robot
@ 2025-03-17 3:06 ` Pu Lehui
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Pu Lehui @ 2025-03-17 3:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: kernel test robot, linux-riscv, linux-kernel
Cc: llvm, oe-kbuild-all, Palmer Dabbelt, Alexandre Ghiti,
Masami Hiramatsu (Google), Steven Rostedt (Google),
Naresh Kamboju, Pu Lehui
On 2025/3/16 9:16, kernel test robot wrote:
> Hi Pu,
>
> kernel test robot noticed the following build errors:
>
> [auto build test ERROR on linus/master]
> [also build test ERROR on v6.14-rc6 next-20250314]
> [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
> And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
> https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information]
>
> url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Pu-Lehui/riscv-fgraph-Fix-stack-layout-to-match-__arch_ftrace_regs-argument-of-ftrace_return_to_handler/20250311-212440
> base: linus/master
> patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250311132243.2178271-1-pulehui%40huaweicloud.com
> patch subject: [PATCH] riscv: fgraph: Fix stack layout to match __arch_ftrace_regs argument of ftrace_return_to_handler
> config: riscv-randconfig-001-20250316 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250316/202503160820.dvqMpH0g-lkp@intel.com/config)
> compiler: clang version 21.0.0git (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project 87916f8c32ebd8e284091db9b70339df57fd1e90)
> reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250316/202503160820.dvqMpH0g-lkp@intel.com/reproduce)
>
> If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
> the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
> | Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202503160820.dvqMpH0g-lkp@intel.com/
>
> All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
>
>>> <instantiation>:1:14: error: operand must be a symbol with %lo/%pcrel_lo/%tprel_lo modifier or an integer in the range [-2048, 2047]
> addi sp, sp, -FREGS_SIZE_ON_STACK
> ^
> arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S:73:2: note: while in macro instantiation
> SAVE_RET_ABI_STATE
> ^
>>> <instantiation>:2:17: error: unexpected token
> sw ra, FREGS_RA(sp)
> ^
> arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S:73:2: note: while in macro instantiation
> SAVE_RET_ABI_STATE
> ^
> <instantiation>:3:17: error: unexpected token
> sw s0, FREGS_S0(sp)
> ^
> arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S:73:2: note: while in macro instantiation
> SAVE_RET_ABI_STATE
> ^
> <instantiation>:4:17: error: unexpected token
> sw a0, FREGS_A0(sp)
> ^
> arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S:73:2: note: while in macro instantiation
> SAVE_RET_ABI_STATE
> ^
> <instantiation>:5:17: error: unexpected token
> sw a1, FREGS_A1(sp)
> ^
> arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S:73:2: note: while in macro instantiation
> SAVE_RET_ABI_STATE
> ^
> <instantiation>:6:15: error: operand must be a symbol with %lo/%pcrel_lo/%tprel_lo modifier or an integer in the range [-2048, 2047]
> addi s0, sp, FREGS_SIZE_ON_STACK
> ^
> arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S:73:2: note: while in macro instantiation
> SAVE_RET_ABI_STATE
> ^
> <instantiation>:1:16: error: unexpected token
> lw ra, FREGS_RA(sp)
> ^
> arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S:77:2: note: while in macro instantiation
> RESTORE_RET_ABI_STATE
> ^
>>> <instantiation>:2:17: error: unexpected token
> lw s0, FREGS_S0(sp)
> ^
> arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S:77:2: note: while in macro instantiation
> RESTORE_RET_ABI_STATE
> ^
> <instantiation>:3:17: error: unexpected token
> lw a0, FREGS_A0(sp)
> ^
> arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S:77:2: note: while in macro instantiation
> RESTORE_RET_ABI_STATE
> ^
> <instantiation>:4:17: error: unexpected token
> lw a1, FREGS_A1(sp)
> ^
> arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S:77:2: note: while in macro instantiation
> RESTORE_RET_ABI_STATE
> ^
> <instantiation>:5:15: error: operand must be a symbol with %lo/%pcrel_lo/%tprel_lo modifier or an integer in the range [-2048, 2047]
> addi sp, sp, FREGS_SIZE_ON_STACK
> ^
> arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S:77:2: note: while in macro instantiation
> RESTORE_RET_ABI_STATE
> ^
>
Nice catch. The reason is that HAVE_DYNAMIC_FTRACE can be diabled when
CONFIG_MMU=n, and lead to disable HAVE_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS.
However, the current fgraph on riscv relies on the infrastructure of
DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS. So let's select HAVE_FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER
depends on HAVE_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS. I will send new soon.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] riscv: fgraph: Fix stack layout to match __arch_ftrace_regs argument of ftrace_return_to_handler
2025-03-11 13:22 [PATCH] riscv: fgraph: Fix stack layout to match __arch_ftrace_regs argument of ftrace_return_to_handler Pu Lehui
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2025-03-16 1:16 ` kernel test robot
@ 2025-03-27 3:24 ` patchwork-bot+linux-riscv
3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: patchwork-bot+linux-riscv @ 2025-03-27 3:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pu Lehui
Cc: linux-riscv, linux-kernel, palmer, alex, mhiramat, rostedt,
naresh.kamboju, pulehui
Hello:
This patch was applied to riscv/linux.git (for-next)
by Alexandre Ghiti <alexghiti@rivosinc.com>:
On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 13:22:43 +0000 you wrote:
> From: Pu Lehui <pulehui@huawei.com>
>
> Naresh Kamboju reported a "Bad frame pointer" kernel warning while
> running LTP trace ftrace_stress_test.sh in riscv. We can reproduce the
> same issue with the following command:
>
> ```
> $ cd /sys/kernel/debug/tracing
> $ echo 'f:myprobe do_nanosleep%return args1=$retval' > dynamic_events
> $ echo 1 > events/fprobes/enable
> $ echo 1 > tracing_on
> $ sleep 1
> ```
>
> [...]
Here is the summary with links:
- riscv: fgraph: Fix stack layout to match __arch_ftrace_regs argument of ftrace_return_to_handler
https://git.kernel.org/riscv/c/67a5ba8f742f
You are awesome, thank you!
--
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2025-03-27 3:24 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2025-03-11 13:22 [PATCH] riscv: fgraph: Fix stack layout to match __arch_ftrace_regs argument of ftrace_return_to_handler Pu Lehui
2025-03-11 14:14 ` Alexandre Ghiti
2025-03-12 19:35 ` Björn Töpel
2025-03-16 1:16 ` kernel test robot
2025-03-17 3:06 ` Pu Lehui
2025-03-27 3:24 ` patchwork-bot+linux-riscv
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox