From: "Török Edwin" <edwintorok@gmail.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf: x86: fix callgraphs of 32-bit processes on 64-bit kernels V2.
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 10:48:54 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BA09776.4020205@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100316170549.GC17537@elte.hu>
On 03/16/2010 07:05 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * T??r??k Edwin <edwintorok@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> When profiling a 32-bit process on a 64-bit kernel, callgraph tracing
>> stopped after the first function, because it has seen a garbage memory address
>> (tried to interpret the frame pointer, and return address as a 64-bit pointer).
>>
>> Fix this by using a struct stack_frame with 32-bit pointers when the TIF_IA32 flag is set.
>>
>> Note that TIF_IA32 flag must be used, and not is_compat_task(), because the
>> latter is only set when the 32-bit process is executing a syscall,
>> which may not always be the case (when tracing page fault events for example).
>>
>> Signed-off-by: T??r??k Edwin <edwintorok@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c
>> index 8c1c070..b85ea9f 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c
>> @@ -2401,6 +2401,20 @@ static int copy_stack_frame(const void __user *fp, struct stack_frame *frame)
>> return bytes == sizeof(*frame);
>> }
>>
>> +struct stack_frame_ia32 {
>> + u32 next_frame;
>> + u32 return_address;
>> +};
>
> Please put such new data type definitions not into the middle of a .c file but
> next to where struct stack_frame is defined.
Ok.
>
>> +
>> +static int copy_stack_frame_ia32(u32 fp, struct stack_frame_ia32 *frame)
>> +{
>> + unsigned long bytes;
>> +
>> + bytes = copy_from_user_nmi(frame, (const void __user*)(unsigned long)fp, sizeof(*frame));
>> +
>> + return bytes == sizeof(*frame);
>> +}
>>
>
> Single-use - should be inline i guess.
>
So should be copy_stack_frame() then.
>> +
>> static void
>> perf_callchain_user(struct pt_regs *regs, struct perf_callchain_entry *entry)
>> {
>> @@ -2414,6 +2428,25 @@ perf_callchain_user(struct pt_regs *regs, struct perf_callchain_entry *entry)
>>
>> callchain_store(entry, PERF_CONTEXT_USER);
>> callchain_store(entry, regs->ip);
>> + if (test_thread_flag(TIF_IA32)) {
>> + /* 32-bit process in 64-bit kernel. */
>> + u32 fp = regs->bp;
>> + struct stack_frame_ia32 frame;
>> + while (entry->nr < PERF_MAX_STACK_DEPTH) {
>
> Please put newlines after local variable definition so that they are clearly
> delimited.
>
> Also, the tabulation is weird - please run it through scripts/checkpatch.pl.
I forgot to change shiftwidth to 8 (I usually use 4).
I cleaned the checkpatch warnings now.
>
>> + frame.next_frame = 0;
>> + frame.return_address = 0;
>> +
>> + if (!copy_stack_frame_ia32(fp, &frame))
>> + break;
>> +
>> + if (fp < (u32)regs->sp)
>> + break;
>> +
>> + callchain_store(entry, frame.return_address);
>> + fp = frame.next_frame;
>> + }
>> + return;
>
> This whole new block should probably be in a helper inline?
To reduce indenting, or why?
>
> Also, it should probably be #ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT or so.
Ok, see V3 of my patch.
Best regards,
--Edwin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-17 8:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-15 15:34 fix callgraphs of 32-bit processes on 64-bit kernels Török Edwin
2010-03-15 15:34 ` [PATCH] perf: x86: " Török Edwin
2010-03-16 14:49 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-16 15:02 ` [PATCH] perf: x86: fix callgraphs of 32-bit processes on 64-bit kernels V2 Török Edwin
2010-03-16 17:05 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-03-17 8:48 ` Török Edwin [this message]
2010-03-17 8:49 ` [PATCH] perf: x86: fix callgraphs of 32-bit processes on 64-bit kernels V3 Török Edwin
2010-03-17 9:54 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-03-17 10:07 ` [PATCH] perf: x86: fix callgraphs of 32-bit processes on 64-bit kernels V4 Török Edwin
2010-03-30 23:18 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-17 9:59 ` [PATCH] perf: x86: fix callgraphs of 32-bit processes on 64-bit kernels V2 Ingo Molnar
2010-03-16 15:04 ` [PATCH] perf: x86: fix callgraphs of 32-bit processes on 64-bit kernels Török Edwin
2010-03-15 16:23 ` Török Edwin
2010-03-16 8:18 ` Török Edwin
2010-03-16 8:47 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-03-16 10:17 ` Török Edwin
2010-03-16 10:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-03-16 9:57 ` [PATCH] perf: install into /usr/local by default Török Edwin
2010-03-16 10:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-03-16 10:20 ` Avi Kivity
2010-03-16 10:25 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-03-16 10:24 ` Török Edwin
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=4BA09776.4020205@gmail.com \
--to=edwintorok@gmail.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@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