From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 027B320AF6C; Thu, 13 Feb 2025 07:53:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1739433215; cv=none; b=VlpDEQxBLEGPCCEKyZ+YiQn59AjBV2iQqT4ZDhZiuTb1lk725qwqlhiaMM1lPjCARK272P052pbOC0jY/dBf9MTHViKDa/MHLq35KlfzA6cEltOg42AXfRv5xnJhcTicHv2QtAMQp8HZBXoXN2xtnfRaU7N0uTON2oLKm9zccbo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1739433215; c=relaxed/simple; bh=SlOp3q3mUFP/fD5O04MBbXfcN5XIWxmKvPTMhBlEFx0=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=LjjGvOvNKPjuE2IajorbQW/Bl++aVQkNmIiOEGCdYjT1mp7wHej8Y0VznMSGLTjjQKfYH9zV7pUbjhpYs/v8Z3AzlWdLNvXFIx51ItHDzvK6JeVkObeip1RT0V0pFXnMqA78qBsO026R0Y/PvUpxiN2s9GYwASPBKKJjGvHUtYc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=u1iOU9zY; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="u1iOU9zY" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2C112C4CED1; Thu, 13 Feb 2025 07:53:34 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1739433214; bh=SlOp3q3mUFP/fD5O04MBbXfcN5XIWxmKvPTMhBlEFx0=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=u1iOU9zYjjs59zBWlMZW/Ux+8qEGJUc1W4jtjvHX5PTc370uXfjQ9pmuHchWYCQ6t XQLG07Z06HWQu59qNfSutUR9oy72B8R6lVAEGraiOUdqEBJRK1XWc7ksIUhfFnRiQN 5dfxHWyRf2xNlPM+b7cktk+wAn5qYTUIKHIk2vlgk0pmhrIeAI/KdisgUumeokdETx 5AAaZT/ab/wF5SyKnbyfKkpEbrzTKXbuAF/IyYIVXxqnR7ITWPeXxRcEPAHaxpal2L jQUHk6/083eL8HJG2bMvFqK9LIfR2nnRR5QgQO14Do9jrl0nVLoRH+EKXHB7Bmg1gk 4Ci0gSbKPduDw== From: Puranjay Mohan To: Song Liu Cc: Indu Bhagat , Weinan Liu , Josh Poimboeuf , Steven Rostedt , Peter Zijlstra , Mark Rutland , roman.gushchin@linux.dev, Will Deacon , Ian Rogers , linux-toolchains@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, live-patching@vger.kernel.org, joe.lawrence@redhat.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] unwind, arm64: add sframe unwinder for kernel In-Reply-To: References: <20250127213310.2496133-1-wnliu@google.com> <00fa304d-84bf-4fca-9b9a-f3b56cd97424@oracle.com> Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2025 07:53:27 +0000 Message-ID: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Song Liu writes: > On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 11:26=E2=80=AFPM Puranjay Mohan wrote: >> >> Song Liu writes: >> >> > On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 4:10=E2=80=AFPM Indu Bhagat wrote: >> >> >> >> On 2/12/25 3:32 PM, Song Liu wrote: >> >> > I run some tests with this set and my RFC set [1]. Most of >> >> > the test is done with kpatch-build. I tested both Puranjay's >> >> > version [3] and my version [4]. >> >> > >> >> > For gcc 14.2.1, I have seen the following issue with this >> >> > test [2]. This happens with both upstream and 6.13.2. >> >> > The livepatch loaded fine, but the system spilled out the >> >> > following warning quickly. >> >> > >> >> >> >> In presence of the issue >> >> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D32666, I'd expect b= ad >> >> data in SFrame section. Which may be causing this symptom? >> >> >> >> To be clear, the issue affects loaded kernel modules. I cannot tell = for >> >> certain - is there module loading involved in your test ? >> > >> > The KLP is a module, I guess that is also affected? >> > >> > During kpatch-build, we added some logic to drop the .sframe section. >> > I guess this is wrong, as we need the .sframe section when we apply >> > the next KLP. However, I don't think the issue is caused by missing >> > .sframe section. >> >> Hi, I did the same testing and did not get the Warning. >> >> I am testing on the 6.12.11 kernel with GCC 11.4.1. > > Could you please also try kernel 6.13.2? > >> Just to verify, the patch we are testing is: > > Yes, this is the test patch. >> >> --- >8 --- > [...] >> --- 8< --- >> >> P.S. - I have a downstream patch for create-diff-object to generate .sfr= ame sections for >> livepatch module, will add it to the PR after some cleanups. > > Yeah, I think the .sframe section is still needed. > Hi Song, Can you try with this: https://github.com/puranjaymohan/kpatch/tree/arm64_wip This has the .sframe logic patch, but it looks as if I wrote that code in a 30 minute leetcode interview. I need to refactor it before I send it for review with the main PR. Can you test with this branch with your setup? Thanks, Puranjay --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iIoEARYKADIWIQQ3wHGvVs/5bdl78BKwwPkjG3B2nQUCZ62k+RQccHVyYW5qYXlA a2VybmVsLm9yZwAKCRCwwPkjG3B2nZisAP9MPQWg3UbuY0yZpUIb4byCtNEENv9t 0uusw4iksm0tqAD/Z9W9tKL7DknJZNY4HVPTLUDdLbjgBRX557V7MwQn1ww= =wnd5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--