From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from szxga02-in.huawei.com (szxga02-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.188]) (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 8303D191 for ; Thu, 12 May 2022 08:30:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kwepemi500013.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.55]) by szxga02-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4KzPz05FRvzGpf9; Thu, 12 May 2022 16:27:24 +0800 (CST) Received: from M910t (10.110.54.157) by kwepemi500013.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.120) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.24; Thu, 12 May 2022 16:30:13 +0800 Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 16:30:07 +0800 From: Changbin Du To: Craig Topper CC: Nick Desaulniers , Changbin Du , Paul Walmsley , Palmer Dabbelt , Albert Ou , Steven Rostedt , , , , , , , Subject: Re: riscv: llvm-compiler: calling convention violation: temporary register $t2 is used to pass the ninth function parameter Message-ID: <20220512083007.gdvlaq7ar2tyarza@M910t> References: <20220510065336.hlfjrc25ajed5zj4@M910t> <10BD31AB-C9F3-45FD-9A4A-EF7DC07C94D5@sifive.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: llvm@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <10BD31AB-C9F3-45FD-9A4A-EF7DC07C94D5@sifive.com> X-Originating-IP: [10.110.54.157] X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems701-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.178) To kwepemi500013.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.120) X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 01:07:14PM -0700, Craig Topper wrote: > I’m guessing that because the function is static, the calling convention was changed to fastcall which allows us to ignore the ABI. > I think so. But the mcount function assumes the ABI is not changed. > > On May 11, 2022, at 11:39 AM, Nick Desaulniers wrote: > > > > On Mon, May 9, 2022 at 11:54 PM Changbin Du wrote: > >> > >> [This is a resent to correct llvm mailist.] > >> > >> Hello, folks, > >> > >> Recently I encountered a kernel crash problem when using ftrace with 'perf ftrace' > >> command on risc-v kernel built with llvm. > >> > >> This crash only exists on llvm build, not reproducable with GCC. So I hope llvm > >> guys can take a look :) > >> > >> The llvm versions I have tried are llvm-13.0.0 and mainline (commit 102bc634cb > >> ("[runtime] Build compiler-rt with --unwindlib=none")). > >> > >> [ 612.947887][ T496] Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 0000000000000001 > >> [ 613.050789][ T496] Hardware name: riscv-virtio,qemu (DT) > >> [ 613.087976][ T496] epc : __find_rr_leaf+0x128/0x220 > >> [ 613.107493][ T496] ra : return_to_handler+0x22/0x24 > >> [ 613.125322][ T496] epc : ffffffff80a1915a ra : ffffffff80009506 sp : ff20000011e43860 > >> [ 613.150124][ T496] gp : ffffffff81812f40 tp : ff6000008bb01580 t0 : ff600000806cf0f0 > >> [ 613.173657][ T496] t1 : 000000000001b29a t2 : 0000000000000001 s0 : ff20000011e43920 > >> [ 613.187311][ T496] s1 : ff600000848c2a00 a0 : 0000000000000002 a1 : 0000000000000002 > >> [ 613.202731][ T496] a2 : fffffffffffffffd a3 : ff6000009d287000 a4 : 00000000000002c0 > >> [ 613.213723][ T496] a5 : ff6000009d259b40 a6 : ffffffffffffff9c a7 : ffffffffffffffff > >> [ 613.226648][ T496] s2 : 0000000000000001 s3 : ff20000011e439d8 s4 : ffffffff8160d140 > >> [ 613.246571][ T496] s5 : 0000000000000002 s6 : 0000000000000000 s7 : 0000000000000000 > >> [ 613.264681][ T496] s8 : 0000000000000064 s9 : 0000000000000000 s10: 0000000000400000 > >> [ 613.277999][ T496] s11: ff600000848c2aa8 t3 : 0000000000000290 t4 : 00000000004002c0 > >> [ 613.303729][ T496] t5 : 00000000ffffffff t6 : ff6000009d2872d0 > >> [ 613.322145][ T496] status: 0000000200000120 badaddr: 0000000000000001 cause: 000000000000000d > >> [ 613.346228][ T496] [] ip6_pol_route+0xb6/0x602 > >> [ 613.365722][ T496] [] ip6_pol_route_output+0x2c/0x34 > >> [ 613.386374][ T496] [] fib6_rule_lookup+0x36/0xa0 > >> [ 613.401865][ T496] [] ip6_route_output_flags_noref+0xd6/0xea > >> [ 613.412776][ T496] [] ip6_route_output_flags+0x52/0xd4 > >> [ 613.432013][ T496] [] ip6_dst_lookup_tail+0x68/0x23a > >> [ 613.456198][ T496] [] ip6_sk_dst_lookup_flow+0x132/0x1cc > >> [ 613.513174][ T496] [] ret_from_syscall+0x0/0x2 > >> [ 613.518973][ T496] [] return_to_handler+0x0/0x24 > >> [ 613.563961][ T496] Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal exception > >> [ 613.572278][ T496] SMP: stopping secondary CPUs > >> [ 613.587449][ T496] ---[ end Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal exception ]--- > >> > >> The crash happened when dereferencing the point 'mpri' at route.c:758. > >> > >> (gdb) l *__find_rr_leaf+0x128 > >> 0xffffffff809da9c4 is in __find_rr_leaf (net/ipv6/route.c:758). > >> 753 > >> 754 if (strict & RT6_LOOKUP_F_REACHABLE) > >> 755 rt6_probe(nh); > >> 756 > >> 757 /* note that m can be RT6_NUD_FAIL_PROBE at this point */ > >> 758 if (m > *mpri) { > >> 759 *do_rr = match_do_rr; > >> 760 *mpri = m; > >> 761 rc = true; > >> 762 } > >> > >> Adding some logs, I found the problem. The ninth passed parameter of function > >> __find_rr_leaf() which is the address of local variable 'mpri', is changed to > >> value '0x1' when inside the function __find_rr_leaf. > >> Here is the code snippet and full link > >> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/9cb7c013420f98fa6fd12fc6a5dc055170c108db/net/ipv6/route.c. > >> > >> static void find_rr_leaf(struct fib6_node *fn, struct fib6_info *leaf, > >> struct fib6_info *rr_head, int oif, int strict, > >> bool *do_rr, struct fib6_result *res) > >> { > >> u32 metric = rr_head->fib6_metric; > >> struct fib6_info *cont = NULL; > >> int mpri = -1; > >> > >> __find_rr_leaf(rr_head, NULL, metric, res, &cont, > >> oif, strict, do_rr, &mpri); > >> ... > >> } > >> > >> Then debugging with gdb, I found this probably is a compiler bug. We can see the > >> local function __find_rr_leaf() is not optimized out and the compiler generates > >> a local symbol for it. The find_rr_leaf() (inlined by fib6_table_lookup) invokes > >> this function with 'jalr' instruction. > >> > >> (gdb) disassemble fib6_table_lookup > >> Dump of assembler code for function fib6_table_lookup: > >> [snip] > >> 0xffffffff80a1240e <+412>: beqz a1,0xffffffff80a12436 > >> 0xffffffff80a12410 <+414>: slli a1,s9,0x20 > >> 0xffffffff80a12414 <+418>: srli a1,a1,0x20 > >> 0xffffffff80a12416 <+420>: sext.w a2,a1 > >> 0xffffffff80a1241a <+424>: addi a7,s0,-125 > >> 0xffffffff80a1241e <+428>: addi t2,s0,-124 > >> 0xffffffff80a12422 <+432>: li a1,0 > >> 0xffffffff80a12424 <+434>: mv a3,s10 > >> 0xffffffff80a12426 <+436>: li a4,0 > >> 0xffffffff80a12428 <+438>: ld a5,-152(s0) > >> 0xffffffff80a1242c <+442>: mv a6,s8 > >> 0xffffffff80a1242e <+444>: auipc ra,0x7 > >> 0xffffffff80a12432 <+448>: jalr -686(ra) # 0xffffffff80a19180 <__find_rr_leaf> > >> [snip] > >> > >> And at line route.c:758, the value of point 'mpri' is stored in temporary register > >> $t2 and $s3 (copied from $t2). > >> > >> (gdb) info scope __find_rr_leaf > >> [snip] > >> Symbol mpri is multi-location: > >> Base address 0xffffffff80a10564 Range 0xffffffff80a19190-0xffffffff80a191ae: a variable in $t2 > >> Range 0xffffffff80a191c0-0xffffffff80a191d6: a variable in $s3 > >> Range 0xffffffff80a19200-0xffffffff80a19208: a variable in $s3 > >> Range 0xffffffff80a1921e-0xffffffff80a192fe: a variable in $s3 > >> Range 0xffffffff80a1930a-0xffffffff80a19356: a variable in $s3 > >> > >> Let's see when register $t2 is corrupted with single-step mode. Obviously, register > >> $t2 is changed by mcount function ftrace_caller(). This is why the bug happens > >> to ftrace. > >> > >> Dump of assembler code for function __find_rr_leaf: > >> 0xffffffff80a19180 <+0>: sd ra,-8(sp) # $t2 = 0xff200000120db7b4 > >> 0xffffffff80a19184 <+4>: auipc ra,0xff5f1 > >> 0xffffffff80a19188 <+8>: jalr -1744(ra) # 0xffffffff80009ab4 # $t2 = 0xff200000120db7b4 > >> => 0xffffffff80a1918c <+12>: ld ra,-8(sp) # $t2 = 0x1, bug, $t2 is corrupted!! > >> 0xffffffff80a19190 <+16>: addi sp,sp,-176 > >> [snip] > >> > >> So now we can come to a conclusion. The generated local function __find_rr_leaf() > >> violates the risc-v calling convention and leads to the panic. It should use stack > >> but *not* temporary register $t2 to pass the ninth parameter! It's okay if the > >> callsite can take care of local symbol callees, but the Function Instrumentation > >> features should be considerated carefully. > >> > >> For comparison, here is the result from gcc (9.2.0): > >> (gdb) info scope __find_rr_leaf > >> [snip] > >> Symbol mpri is a complex DWARF expression: > >> 0: DW_OP_fbreg 0, length 8. > >> > >> I also built a simple test function with 9 parameters by clang and same cflags, > >> but cannot reproduce it. Maybe it is conditional? > >> > >> Simple test code: > >> __attribute__ ((noinline)) > >> void test_func(int *a, int *b, int *c, int *d, int *e, int *f, int *g, int *h, int *i) > >> { > >> printf("__find_rr_leaf: %d\n", *i); > >> } > >> > >> int main(void) > >> { > >> int a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h,i = 100; > >> > >> test_func(&a,&b,&c,&d,&e,&f,&g,&h,&i); > >> return 0; > >> } > > > > Hmm...any chance you could come up with a more concise test case then > > using creduce [0] or cvise [1]? > > [0] https://embed.cs.utah.edu/creduce/ > > [1] https://github.com/marxin/cvise > > > > > >> > >> -- > >> Cheers, > >> Changbin Du > >> > > > > > > -- > > Thanks, > > ~Nick Desaulniers > -- Cheers, Changbin Du