From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32AA5C433EF for ; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:26:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232434AbhLNO0h (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Dec 2021 09:26:37 -0500 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:28598 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231143AbhLNO0f (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Dec 2021 09:26:35 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098409.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 1BED90JX007433; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:26:05 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=date : from : to : cc : subject : message-id : references : mime-version : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : in-reply-to; s=pp1; bh=5IDVvaOqs/M3ujUhAS1nkCGOrtDe4vl4SwHL89S0Xdg=; b=cJjOtaJJPkquyFm0ftVR55TchRrTILl+LolXcdVOi0x4v3W9jGq8vSxNiJ57/yA8Abye oN0ms9Ck+SKBi60uyq0luSiRcsbdha+DqXaMSSYtfQ1/aLuNo7NwszIv4i63vqd6FNJ6 evMdGA2zHrj98vyA4+Kn1b90aXfFtmY9VhZ82rUC1ePPgcYby6RPg7Dutu0qX3uT4uni UZvXk+SuJqFIpAi6MXMQtSr148al5vGvMReRW3Tz/rL3MR2CCeFEQ+Gj+T4rmMJboVxl xzFisyHXbfBisLTfEUikuwpg3hESpbFgMbDpRYGH/uKCNZQsWCQLPRHIg1yZ3EEVXS/+ FA== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3cx9r9ptk6-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:26:05 +0000 Received: from m0098409.ppops.net (m0098409.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 1BEDCXJg015524; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:26:04 GMT Received: from ppma06ams.nl.ibm.com (66.31.33a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.51.49.102]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3cx9r9ptj4-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:26:04 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma06ams.nl.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma06ams.nl.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 1BEDiCfN032733; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:26:02 GMT Received: from b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay10.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.195]) by ppma06ams.nl.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3cvk8j035r-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:26:02 +0000 Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.58]) by b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 1BEEPxsf43909628 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:25:59 GMT Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB5CC4C04A; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:25:59 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 484894C04E; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:25:59 +0000 (GMT) Received: from osiris (unknown [9.145.168.104]) by d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:25:59 +0000 (GMT) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2021 15:25:57 +0100 From: Heiko Carstens To: Christophe Leroy Cc: Steven Rostedt , Josh Poimboeuf , Jiri Kosina , Miroslav Benes , Petr Mladek , Joe Lawrence , Ingo Molnar , "Naveen N . Rao" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" , "live-patching@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-s390@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/5] Implement livepatch on PPC32 Message-ID: References: <20211028093547.48c69dfe@gandalf.local.home> <6209682d-0caa-b779-8763-376a984d8ed8@csgroup.eu> <20211213121536.25e5488d@gandalf.local.home> <5511f43c-192a-622b-7c72-52e07f0032c2@csgroup.eu> <20211213123338.65eda5a0@gandalf.local.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: JnbFfRm75kVyNUBP3Cs4lugyZBEgQEnO X-Proofpoint-GUID: 3DaxL9v1MACAb8vQfjQA_AaDRKRC4gR5 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.790,Hydra:6.0.425,FMLib:17.11.62.513 definitions=2021-12-14_06,2021-12-14_01,2021-12-02_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 impostorscore=0 clxscore=1011 suspectscore=0 mlxlogscore=832 lowpriorityscore=0 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 priorityscore=1501 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2110150000 definitions=main-2112140082 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 05:50:52PM +0000, Christophe Leroy wrote: > Le 13/12/2021 à 18:33, Steven Rostedt a écrit : > > On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 17:30:48 +0000 > > Christophe Leroy wrote: > > > >> Thanks, I will try that. > >> > >> I can't find ftrace_graph_func() in s390. Does it mean that s390 doesn't > >> have a working function tracer anymore ? > >> > >> I see your commit 0c0593b45c9b4 ("x86/ftrace: Make function graph use > >> ftrace directly") is dated 8 Oct 2021 while 5740a7c71ab6 ("s390/ftrace: > >> add HAVE_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS support") is 4 Oct 2021. > > > > Hmm, maybe not. I can't test it. > > > > This needs to be fixed if that's the case. > > > > Thanks for bringing it up! It still works, we run the full ftrace/kprobes selftests from the kernel every day on multiple machines with several kernels (besides other Linus' tree, but also linux-next). That said, I wanted to change s390's code follow what x86 is currently doing anyway. One thing to note: commit 5740a7c71ab6 ("s390/ftrace: add HAVE_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS support") looks only that simple because ftrace_caller _and_ ftrace_regs_caller used to save all register contents into the pt_regs structure, which never was a requirement, but implicitly fulfills the HAVE_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS requirements. Not sure if powerpc passes enough register contents via pt_regs for HAVE_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS though. Might be something to check? From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1EDE2C433EF for ; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:27:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4JD10v3LQ5z3cC5 for ; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 01:27:11 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=pp1 header.b=cJjOtaJJ; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com (client-ip=148.163.156.1; helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com; envelope-from=hca@linux.ibm.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=pp1 header.b=cJjOtaJJ; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4JD1050y0gz2yWL for ; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 01:26:28 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098409.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 1BED90JX007433; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:26:05 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=date : from : to : cc : subject : message-id : references : mime-version : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : in-reply-to; s=pp1; bh=5IDVvaOqs/M3ujUhAS1nkCGOrtDe4vl4SwHL89S0Xdg=; b=cJjOtaJJPkquyFm0ftVR55TchRrTILl+LolXcdVOi0x4v3W9jGq8vSxNiJ57/yA8Abye oN0ms9Ck+SKBi60uyq0luSiRcsbdha+DqXaMSSYtfQ1/aLuNo7NwszIv4i63vqd6FNJ6 evMdGA2zHrj98vyA4+Kn1b90aXfFtmY9VhZ82rUC1ePPgcYby6RPg7Dutu0qX3uT4uni UZvXk+SuJqFIpAi6MXMQtSr148al5vGvMReRW3Tz/rL3MR2CCeFEQ+Gj+T4rmMJboVxl xzFisyHXbfBisLTfEUikuwpg3hESpbFgMbDpRYGH/uKCNZQsWCQLPRHIg1yZ3EEVXS/+ FA== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3cx9r9ptk6-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:26:05 +0000 Received: from m0098409.ppops.net (m0098409.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 1BEDCXJg015524; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:26:04 GMT Received: from ppma06ams.nl.ibm.com (66.31.33a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.51.49.102]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3cx9r9ptj4-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:26:04 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma06ams.nl.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma06ams.nl.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 1BEDiCfN032733; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:26:02 GMT Received: from b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay10.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.195]) by ppma06ams.nl.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3cvk8j035r-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:26:02 +0000 Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.58]) by b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 1BEEPxsf43909628 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:25:59 GMT Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB5CC4C04A; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:25:59 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 484894C04E; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:25:59 +0000 (GMT) Received: from osiris (unknown [9.145.168.104]) by d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:25:59 +0000 (GMT) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2021 15:25:57 +0100 From: Heiko Carstens To: Christophe Leroy Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/5] Implement livepatch on PPC32 Message-ID: References: <20211028093547.48c69dfe@gandalf.local.home> <6209682d-0caa-b779-8763-376a984d8ed8@csgroup.eu> <20211213121536.25e5488d@gandalf.local.home> <5511f43c-192a-622b-7c72-52e07f0032c2@csgroup.eu> <20211213123338.65eda5a0@gandalf.local.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: JnbFfRm75kVyNUBP3Cs4lugyZBEgQEnO X-Proofpoint-GUID: 3DaxL9v1MACAb8vQfjQA_AaDRKRC4gR5 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.790,Hydra:6.0.425,FMLib:17.11.62.513 definitions=2021-12-14_06,2021-12-14_01,2021-12-02_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 impostorscore=0 clxscore=1011 suspectscore=0 mlxlogscore=832 lowpriorityscore=0 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 priorityscore=1501 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2110150000 definitions=main-2112140082 X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Petr Mladek , Joe Lawrence , "linux-s390@vger.kernel.org" , Jiri Kosina , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Steven Rostedt , Ingo Molnar , Josh Poimboeuf , "live-patching@vger.kernel.org" , "Naveen N . Rao" , Miroslav Benes , "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 05:50:52PM +0000, Christophe Leroy wrote: > Le 13/12/2021 à 18:33, Steven Rostedt a écrit : > > On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 17:30:48 +0000 > > Christophe Leroy wrote: > > > >> Thanks, I will try that. > >> > >> I can't find ftrace_graph_func() in s390. Does it mean that s390 doesn't > >> have a working function tracer anymore ? > >> > >> I see your commit 0c0593b45c9b4 ("x86/ftrace: Make function graph use > >> ftrace directly") is dated 8 Oct 2021 while 5740a7c71ab6 ("s390/ftrace: > >> add HAVE_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS support") is 4 Oct 2021. > > > > Hmm, maybe not. I can't test it. > > > > This needs to be fixed if that's the case. > > > > Thanks for bringing it up! It still works, we run the full ftrace/kprobes selftests from the kernel every day on multiple machines with several kernels (besides other Linus' tree, but also linux-next). That said, I wanted to change s390's code follow what x86 is currently doing anyway. One thing to note: commit 5740a7c71ab6 ("s390/ftrace: add HAVE_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS support") looks only that simple because ftrace_caller _and_ ftrace_regs_caller used to save all register contents into the pt_regs structure, which never was a requirement, but implicitly fulfills the HAVE_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS requirements. Not sure if powerpc passes enough register contents via pt_regs for HAVE_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS though. Might be something to check?