From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: madvenka@linux.microsoft.com
Cc: mark.rutland@arm.com, jpoimboe@redhat.com, jthierry@redhat.com,
catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
live-patching@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/8] arm64: Implement stack trace termination record
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2021 15:09:05 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210318150905.GL5469@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210315165800.5948-2-madvenka@linux.microsoft.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1183 bytes --]
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 11:57:53AM -0500, madvenka@linux.microsoft.com wrote:
> In summary, task pt_regs->stackframe is where a successful stack trace ends.
> .if \el == 0
> - mov x29, xzr
> + stp xzr, xzr, [sp, #S_STACKFRAME]
> .else
> stp x29, x22, [sp, #S_STACKFRAME]
> - add x29, sp, #S_STACKFRAME
> .endif
> + add x29, sp, #S_STACKFRAME
For both user and kernel threads this patch (at least by itself) results
in an additional record being reported in stack traces with a NULL
function pointer since it keeps the existing record where it is and adds
this new fixed record below it. This is addressed for the kernel later
in the series, by "arm64: Terminate the stack trace at TASK_FRAME and
EL0_FRAME", but will still be visible to other unwinders such as
debuggers. I'm not sure that this *matters* but it might and should at
least be called out more explicitly.
If we are going to add the extra record there would probably be less
potential for confusion if we pointed it at some sensibly named dummy
function so anything or anyone that does see it on the stack doesn't get
confused by a NULL.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-18 15:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <5997dfe8d261a3a543667b83c902883c1e4bd270>
2021-03-15 16:57 ` [RFC PATCH v2 0/8] arm64: Implement reliable stack trace madvenka
2021-03-15 16:57 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/8] arm64: Implement stack trace termination record madvenka
2021-03-18 15:09 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2021-03-18 20:26 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-03-19 12:30 ` Mark Brown
2021-03-19 14:29 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-03-19 18:19 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-03-19 22:03 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-03-23 10:24 ` Mark Rutland
2021-03-23 12:39 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-03-15 16:57 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/8] arm64: Implement frame types madvenka
2021-03-18 17:40 ` Mark Brown
2021-03-18 22:22 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-03-19 13:22 ` Mark Brown
2021-03-19 14:40 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-03-19 15:02 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-03-19 16:20 ` Mark Brown
2021-03-19 16:27 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-03-23 10:34 ` Mark Rutland
2021-03-15 16:57 ` [RFC PATCH v2 3/8] arm64: Terminate the stack trace at TASK_FRAME and EL0_FRAME madvenka
2021-03-18 18:26 ` Mark Brown
2021-03-18 20:29 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-03-23 10:36 ` Mark Rutland
2021-03-23 12:40 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-03-15 16:57 ` [RFC PATCH v2 4/8] arm64: Detect an EL1 exception frame and mark a stack trace unreliable madvenka
2021-03-23 10:42 ` Mark Rutland
2021-03-23 12:46 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-03-23 13:04 ` Mark Rutland
2021-03-23 13:31 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-03-23 14:33 ` Mark Rutland
2021-03-23 15:22 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-03-15 16:57 ` [RFC PATCH v2 5/8] arm64: Detect an FTRACE " madvenka
2021-03-23 10:51 ` Mark Rutland
2021-03-23 12:56 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-03-23 13:36 ` Mark Rutland
2021-03-23 13:38 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-03-23 14:15 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-03-23 14:57 ` Mark Rutland
2021-03-23 15:26 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-03-23 16:20 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-03-23 17:02 ` Mark Rutland
2021-03-23 17:23 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-03-23 17:27 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-03-23 18:27 ` Mark Brown
2021-03-23 20:23 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-03-23 18:30 ` Mark Rutland
2021-03-23 20:24 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-03-23 21:04 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-03-23 16:48 ` Mark Rutland
2021-03-23 16:53 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-03-23 17:09 ` Mark Rutland
2021-03-15 16:57 ` [RFC PATCH v2 6/8] arm64: Check the return PC of every stack frame madvenka
2021-03-15 16:57 ` [RFC PATCH v2 7/8] arm64: Detect kretprobed functions in stack trace madvenka
2021-03-15 16:58 ` [RFC PATCH v2 8/8] arm64: Implement arch_stack_walk_reliable() madvenka
2021-03-15 19:01 ` [RFC PATCH v2 0/8] arm64: Implement reliable stack trace Madhavan T. Venkataraman
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=20210318150905.GL5469@sirena.org.uk \
--to=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=jthierry@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=live-patching@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=madvenka@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=will@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).