From: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
To: <sedat.dilek@gmail.com>
Cc: "Mark Wieelard" <mark@klomp.org>,
"Masahiro Yamada" <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
"Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo" <acme@kernel.org>,
"Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo" <arnaldo.melo@gmail.com>,
dwarves@vger.kernel.org,
"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, "Jiri Olsa" <jolsa@kernel.org>,
"Jan Engelhardt" <jengelh@inai.de>,
"Domenico Andreoli" <cavok@debian.org>,
"Matthias Schwarzott" <zzam@gentoo.org>,
"Andrii Nakryiko" <andriin@fb.com>,
"Paul Moore" <paul@paul-moore.com>,
"Ondrej Mosnacek" <omosnace@redhat.com>,
"Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>,
"Tom Stellard" <tstellar@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: ERROR: INT DW_ATE_unsigned_1 Error emitting BTF type
Date: Sat, 6 Feb 2021 11:32:57 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <89f15151-6843-b260-c8f4-88deefd7d569@fb.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+icZUV=-NmFtF9RQTRnbwBUiaPnroiSwyv-9RxA-3-nrgQ_rQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 2/6/21 11:28 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 6, 2021 at 8:22 PM Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 6, 2021 at 8:17 PM Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2/6/21 10:10 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>> On Sat, Feb 6, 2021 at 6:53 PM Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2/6/21 8:24 AM, Mark Wieelard wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 06, 2021 at 12:26:44AM -0800, Yonghong Song wrote:
>>>>>>> With the above vmlinux, the issue appears to be handling
>>>>>>> DW_ATE_signed_1, DW_ATE_unsigned_{1,24,40}.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The following patch should fix the issue:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That doesn't really make sense to me. Why is the compiler emitting a
>>>>>> DW_TAG_base_type that needs to be interpreted according to the
>>>>>> DW_AT_name attribute?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If the issue is that the size of the base type cannot be expressed in
>>>>>> bytes then the DWARF spec provides the following option:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If the value of an object of the given type does not fully occupy
>>>>>> the storage described by a byte size attribute, the base type
>>>>>> entry may also have a DW_AT_bit_size and a DW_AT_data_bit_offset
>>>>>> attribute, both of whose values are integer constant values (see
>>>>>> Section 2.19 on page 55). The bit size attribute describes the
>>>>>> actual size in bits used to represent values of the given
>>>>>> type. The data bit offset attribute is the offset in bits from the
>>>>>> beginning of the containing storage to the beginning of the
>>>>>> value. Bits that are part of the offset are padding. If this
>>>>>> attribute is omitted a default data bit offset of zero is assumed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Would it be possible to use that encoding of those special types? If
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree with you. I do not like comparing me as well. Unfortunately,
>>>>> there is no enough information in dwarf to find out actual information.
>>>>> The following is the dwarf dump with vmlinux (Sedat provided) for
>>>>> DW_ATE_unsigned_1.
>>>>>
>>>>> 0x000e97e9: DW_TAG_base_type
>>>>> DW_AT_name ("DW_ATE_unsigned_1")
>>>>> DW_AT_encoding (DW_ATE_unsigned)
>>>>> DW_AT_byte_size (0x00)
>>>>>
>>>>> There is no DW_AT_bit_size and DW_AT_bit_offset for base type.
>>>>> AFAIK, these two attributes typically appear in struct/union members
>>>>> together with DW_AT_byte_size.
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe compilers (clang in this case) can emit DW_AT_bit_size = 1
>>>>> and DW_AT_bit_offset = 0/7 (depending on big/little endian) and
>>>>> this case, we just test and get DW_AT_bit_size and it should work.
>>>>>
>>>>> But I think BTF does not need this (DW_ATE_unsigned_1) for now.
>>>>> I checked dwarf dump and it is mostly used for some arith operation
>>>>> encoded in dump (in this case, e.g., shift by 1 bit)
>>>>>
>>>>> 0x000015cf: DW_TAG_base_type
>>>>> DW_AT_name ("DW_ATE_unsigned_1")
>>>>> DW_AT_encoding (DW_ATE_unsigned)
>>>>> DW_AT_byte_size (0x00)
>>>>>
>>>>> 0x00010ed9: DW_TAG_formal_parameter
>>>>> DW_AT_location (DW_OP_lit0, DW_OP_not,
>>>>> DW_OP_convert (0x000015cf) "DW_ATE_unsigned_1", DW_OP_convert
>>>>> (0x000015d4) "DW_ATE_unsigned_8", DW_OP_stack_value)
>>>>> DW_AT_abstract_origin (0x00013984 "branch")
>>>>>
>>>>> Look at clang frontend, only the following types are encoded with
>>>>> unsigned dwarf type.
>>>>>
>>>>> case BuiltinType::UShort:
>>>>> case BuiltinType::UInt:
>>>>> case BuiltinType::UInt128:
>>>>> case BuiltinType::ULong:
>>>>> case BuiltinType::WChar_U:
>>>>> case BuiltinType::ULongLong:
>>>>> Encoding = llvm::dwarf::DW_ATE_unsigned;
>>>>> break;
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> not, can we try to come up with some extension that doesn't require
>>>>>> consumers to match magic names?
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You want me to upload mlx5_core.ko?
>>>
>>> I just sent out a patch. You are cc'ed. I also attached in this email.
>>> Yes, it would be great if you can upload mlx5_core.ko so I can
>>> double check with this DW_ATE_unsigned_160 which is really usual.
>>>
>>
>> Yupp, just built a new pahole :-).
>> Re-building linux-kernel...
>>
>> Will upload mlx5_core.ko - need zstd-ed it before.
>>
>
> Hmm, I guess you want a mlx5_core.ko with your patch applied-to-pahole-1.20 :-)?
this should work too. I want to check dwarf data. My patch won't impact
dwarf generation.
>
>> - Sedat -
>>
>>>>
>>>> When looking with llvm-dwarf for DW_ATE_unsigned_160:
>>>>
>>>> 0x00d65616: DW_TAG_base_type
>>>> DW_AT_name ("DW_ATE_unsigned_160")
>>>> DW_AT_encoding (DW_ATE_unsigned)
>>>> DW_AT_byte_size (0x14)
>>>>
>>>> If you need further information, please let me know.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> - Sedat -
>>>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-06 19:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-04 22:07 ANNOUNCE: pahole v1.20 (gcc11 DWARF5's default, lots of ELF sections, BTF) Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2021-02-04 22:10 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-05 0:01 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2021-02-05 4:33 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2021-02-05 7:39 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2021-02-05 9:33 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2021-02-05 16:25 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2021-02-05 22:11 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2021-02-05 23:55 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2021-02-07 6:40 ` Andrii Nakryiko
[not found] ` <CA+icZUVQSojGgnis8Ds5GW-7-PVMZ2w4X5nQKSSkBPf-29NS6Q@mail.gmail.com>
2021-02-05 14:41 ` ERROR: INT DW_ATE_unsigned_1 Error emitting BTF type Sedat Dilek
2021-02-05 15:23 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-05 15:28 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2021-02-05 15:40 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-05 17:48 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-05 18:53 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-05 19:06 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-05 19:10 ` Yonghong Song
2021-02-05 19:15 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-05 19:20 ` Yonghong Song
2021-02-05 19:24 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-05 19:44 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-05 19:21 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-05 19:30 ` Fāng-ruì Sòng
2021-02-05 19:38 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-05 19:24 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2021-02-05 20:03 ` Yonghong Song
2021-02-05 20:31 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-05 21:54 ` Yonghong Song
2021-02-06 3:34 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-06 5:44 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-06 5:53 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-06 6:26 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-06 6:52 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-06 8:26 ` Yonghong Song
2021-02-06 8:32 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-06 9:32 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-06 9:37 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-06 9:48 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-06 10:16 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-06 10:23 ` Sedat Dilek
[not found] ` <CA+icZUW2HVWSZiOHvrjXGP-ubL_iWEHy1u6B3zQn=pN-J1FnSQ@mail.gmail.com>
2021-02-06 12:54 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-06 16:24 ` Mark Wieelard
2021-02-06 17:53 ` Yonghong Song
2021-02-06 18:10 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-06 19:17 ` Yonghong Song
2021-02-06 19:22 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-06 19:28 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-06 19:32 ` Yonghong Song [this message]
2021-02-06 19:44 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-06 20:12 ` Yonghong Song
2021-02-06 20:46 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-06 7:26 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-05 21:10 ` Nick Desaulniers
2021-02-05 21:16 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-05 21:40 ` Nick Desaulniers
2021-02-05 21:42 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-08 2:44 ` ANNOUNCE: pahole v1.20 (gcc11 DWARF5's default, lots of ELF sections, BTF) Sedat Dilek
2021-02-08 12:32 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2021-02-08 12:36 ` Sedat Dilek
2021-02-17 12:08 ` Domenico Andreoli
2021-02-17 12:48 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
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=89f15151-6843-b260-c8f4-88deefd7d569@fb.com \
--to=yhs@fb.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=andriin@fb.com \
--cc=arnaldo.melo@gmail.com \
--cc=berrange@redhat.com \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=cavok@debian.org \
--cc=dwarves@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jengelh@inai.de \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark@klomp.org \
--cc=masahiroy@kernel.org \
--cc=omosnace@redhat.com \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=sedat.dilek@gmail.com \
--cc=tstellar@redhat.com \
--cc=zzam@gentoo.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).