All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
To: Torsten Duwe <duwe@lst.de>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>,
	Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	live-patching@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] On ppc64le we HAVE_RELIABLE_STACKTRACE
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2017 08:05:01 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171212140501.44vf4xcz6jhbqofd@treble> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171212113912.GA1907@lst.de>

On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 12:39:12PM +0100, Torsten Duwe wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> The "Power Architecture 64-Bit ELF V2 ABI" says in section 2.3.2.3:
> 
> [...] There are several rules that must be adhered to in order to ensure
> reliable and consistent call chain backtracing:
> 
> * Before a function calls any other function, it shall establish its
>   own stack frame, whose size shall be a multiple of 16 bytes.

What about leaf functions?  If a leaf function doesn't establish a stack
frame, and it has inline asm which contains a blr to another function,
this ABI is broken.

Also, even for non-leaf functions, is it possible for GCC to insert the
inline asm before it sets up the stack frame?  (This is an occasional
problem on x86.)

Also, what about hand-coded asm?

> To me this sounds like the equivalent of HAVE_RELIABLE_STACKTRACE.
> This patch may be unneccessarily limited to ppc64le, but OTOH the only
> user of this flag so far is livepatching, which is only implemented on
> PPCs with 64-LE, a.k.a. ELF ABI v2.

In addition to fixing the above issues, the unwinder also needs to
detect interrupts (i.e., preemption) and page faults on the stack of a
blocked task.  If a function were preempted before it created a stack
frame, or if a leaf function blocked on a page fault, the stack trace
will skip the function's caller, so such a trace will need to be
reported to livepatch as unreliable.

Furthermore, the "reliable" unwinder needs to have a way to report an
error if it doesn't reach the end.  This probably just means ensuring
that it reaches the user mode registers on the stack.

And as Miroslav mentioned, once that's all done, implement
save_stack_trace_tsk_reliable().

I don't think the above is documented anywhere, it would be good to put
it in the livepatch doc.

-- 
Josh

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-12-12 14:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-10-04 15:25 [PATCH v2] kernel/module_64.c: Add REL24 relocation support of livepatch symbols Kamalesh Babulal
2017-10-05  6:56 ` Naveen N . Rao
2017-10-05 12:43 ` Torsten Duwe
2017-10-06  5:43   ` Kamalesh Babulal
2017-10-11  9:44     ` Kamalesh Babulal
2017-10-06  5:57   ` Kamalesh Babulal
2017-10-17 14:47     ` Torsten Duwe
2017-10-18  6:17       ` Kamalesh Babulal
2017-10-20 12:07         ` Torsten Duwe
2017-10-21  0:59           ` Balbir Singh
2017-10-23  8:19             ` Kamalesh Babulal
2017-12-12 11:39               ` [PATCH] On ppc64le we HAVE_RELIABLE_STACKTRACE Torsten Duwe
2017-12-12 12:12                 ` Miroslav Benes
2017-12-12 13:02                   ` Torsten Duwe
2018-02-27 16:09                   ` [PATCH 2/2] ppc64le save_stack_trace_tsk_reliable (Was: HAVE_RELIABLE_STACKTRACE) Torsten Duwe
2018-03-08 21:43                     ` Balbir Singh
2018-03-09 15:54                       ` Torsten Duwe
2017-12-12 14:05                 ` Josh Poimboeuf [this message]
2017-12-15  9:40                   ` [PATCH] On ppc64le we HAVE_RELIABLE_STACKTRACE Nicholas Piggin
2017-12-18  2:58                     ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-12-18  3:39                       ` Balbir Singh
2017-12-18  3:39                         ` Balbir Singh
2017-12-18  4:01                         ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-12-18  4:01                           ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-12-18  5:33                       ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-12-18 18:56                         ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-12-19  2:46                           ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-12-19 11:28                           ` Torsten Duwe
2017-12-19 21:46                             ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-12-21 12:10                               ` Michael Ellerman
2017-12-23  4:00                                 ` Josh Poimboeuf

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=20171212140501.44vf4xcz6jhbqofd@treble \
    --to=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
    --cc=bsingharora@gmail.com \
    --cc=duwe@lst.de \
    --cc=jkosina@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=live-patching@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.