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 mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7336C433EF for ; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 17:54:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A6C976109F for ; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 17:54:57 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org A6C976109F Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=NhIvY4tn33CFrmgN09JewIx2rxlG/+4nlWjPUjKS8Qc=; b=kH0VksK9s6sjK4 JWqjz0JtUNTkHtfVKaUbn2suJsGNOL7WvIzTCeZr4//01arqxAZ8x48KMS4D9beVhTK4F7xbuuYGu Mvwc8uqy2khvq5LhFzOl8WoMMyCLJd+npF2X4dd2hd0aZIkFhK0FiSuryvFHwg2nYAXgprbEGaEDG 23R7TmFaG20RlPdvw7ZZQ+f64z/hv1kR0MlddKCLjOmkAu+/FLxD8/qKcQf8pQAg6B83k4xbtti1y 26awXZEI2hnoZu52JhOS29EkXhOWCTDVxq6kRuG8KdT4YV0CzidbKFpDaz41Lz7K5mDXcLzW4u0j0 8y+5KtX/lPSXoQnPhNPA==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1mfn7I-005bk8-Vh; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 17:53:37 +0000 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1mfn7F-005bjT-Ty for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 17:53:35 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED5E21FB; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 10:53:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from C02TD0UTHF1T.local (unknown [10.57.72.240]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2D85F3F70D; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 10:53:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2021 18:53:25 +0100 From: Mark Rutland To: madvenka@linux.microsoft.com Cc: broonie@kernel.org, jpoimboe@redhat.com, ardb@kernel.org, nobuta.keiya@fujitsu.com, sjitindarsingh@gmail.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, jmorris@namei.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, live-patching@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 08/11] arm64: Rename unwinder functions, prevent them from being traced and kprobed Message-ID: <20211027175325.GC58503@C02TD0UTHF1T.local> References: <20211015025847.17694-1-madvenka@linux.microsoft.com> <20211015025847.17694-9-madvenka@linux.microsoft.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20211015025847.17694-9-madvenka@linux.microsoft.com> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20211027_105334_087487_9811EDAC X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 35.51 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 09:58:44PM -0500, madvenka@linux.microsoft.com wrote: > From: "Madhavan T. Venkataraman" > > Rename unwinder functions for consistency and better naming. > > - Rename start_backtrace() to unwind_start(). > - Rename unwind_frame() to unwind_next(). > - Rename walk_stackframe() to unwind(). This looks good to me. Could we split this from the krpbes/tracing changes? I think this stands on it's own, and (as below) the kprobes/tracing changes need some more explanation, and would make sense as a separate patch. > Prevent the following unwinder functions from being traced: > > - unwind_start() > - unwind_next() > > unwind() is already prevented from being traced. This could do with an explanation in the commis message as to why we need to do this. If this is fixing a latent issue, it should be in a preparatory patch that we can backport. I dug into this a bit, and from taking a look, we prohibited ftrace in commit: 0c32706dac1b0a72 ("arm64: stacktrace: avoid tracing arch_stack_walk()") ... which is just one special case of graph return stack unbalancing, and should be addressed by using HAVE_FUNCTION_GRAPH_RET_ADDR_PTR, so with the patch making us use HAVE_FUNCTION_GRAPH_RET_ADDR_PTR, that's no longer necessary. So we no longer seem to have a specific reason to prohibit ftrace here. > Prevent the following unwinder functions from being kprobed: > > - unwind_start() > > unwind_next() and unwind() are already prevented from being kprobed. Likewise, I think this needs some explanation. From diggin, we prohibited kprobes in commit: ee07b93e7721ccd5 ("arm64: unwind: Prohibit probing on return_address()") ... and the commit message says we need to do this because this is (transitively) called by trace_hardirqs_off(), which is kprobes blacklisted, but doesn't explain the actual problem this results in. AFAICT x86 directly uses __builtin_return_address() here, but that won't recover rewritten addresses, which seems like a bug (or at least a limitation) on x86, assuming I've read that correctly. Thanks, Mark. > Signed-off-by: Madhavan T. Venkataraman > --- > arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++--------------- > 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c > index 7d32cee9ef4b..f4f3575f71fd 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c > @@ -33,8 +33,8 @@ > */ > > > -static void start_backtrace(struct stackframe *frame, unsigned long fp, > - unsigned long pc) > +static void notrace unwind_start(struct stackframe *frame, unsigned long fp, > + unsigned long pc) > { > frame->fp = fp; > frame->pc = pc; > @@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ static void start_backtrace(struct stackframe *frame, unsigned long fp, > /* > * Prime the first unwind. > * > - * In unwind_frame() we'll check that the FP points to a valid stack, > + * In unwind_next() we'll check that the FP points to a valid stack, > * which can't be STACK_TYPE_UNKNOWN, and the first unwind will be > * treated as a transition to whichever stack that happens to be. The > * prev_fp value won't be used, but we set it to 0 such that it is > @@ -56,6 +56,8 @@ static void start_backtrace(struct stackframe *frame, unsigned long fp, > frame->prev_type = STACK_TYPE_UNKNOWN; > } > > +NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(unwind_start); > + > /* > * Unwind from one frame record (A) to the next frame record (B). > * > @@ -63,8 +65,8 @@ static void start_backtrace(struct stackframe *frame, unsigned long fp, > * records (e.g. a cycle), determined based on the location and fp value of A > * and the location (but not the fp value) of B. > */ > -static int notrace unwind_frame(struct task_struct *tsk, > - struct stackframe *frame) > +static int notrace unwind_next(struct task_struct *tsk, > + struct stackframe *frame) > { > unsigned long fp = frame->fp; > struct stack_info info; > @@ -104,7 +106,7 @@ static int notrace unwind_frame(struct task_struct *tsk, > > /* > * Record this frame record's values and location. The prev_fp and > - * prev_type are only meaningful to the next unwind_frame() invocation. > + * prev_type are only meaningful to the next unwind_next() invocation. > */ > frame->fp = READ_ONCE_NOCHECK(*(unsigned long *)(fp)); > frame->pc = READ_ONCE_NOCHECK(*(unsigned long *)(fp + 8)); > @@ -132,28 +134,30 @@ static int notrace unwind_frame(struct task_struct *tsk, > > return 0; > } > -NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(unwind_frame); > > -static void notrace walk_stackframe(struct task_struct *tsk, > - unsigned long fp, unsigned long pc, > - bool (*fn)(void *, unsigned long), > - void *data) > +NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(unwind_next); > + > +static void notrace unwind(struct task_struct *tsk, > + unsigned long fp, unsigned long pc, > + bool (*fn)(void *, unsigned long), > + void *data) > { > struct stackframe frame; > > - start_backtrace(&frame, fp, pc); > + unwind_start(&frame, fp, pc); > > while (1) { > int ret; > > if (!fn(data, frame.pc)) > break; > - ret = unwind_frame(tsk, &frame); > + ret = unwind_next(tsk, &frame); > if (ret < 0) > break; > } > } > -NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(walk_stackframe); > + > +NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(unwind); > > static bool dump_backtrace_entry(void *arg, unsigned long where) > { > @@ -208,7 +212,7 @@ noinline notrace void arch_stack_walk(stack_trace_consume_fn consume_entry, > fp = thread_saved_fp(task); > pc = thread_saved_pc(task); > } > - walk_stackframe(task, fp, pc, consume_entry, cookie); > + unwind(task, fp, pc, consume_entry, cookie); > > } > > -- > 2.25.1 > _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel