From: "Madhavan T. Venkataraman" <madvenka@linux.microsoft.com>
To: Chen Zhongjin <chenzhongjin@huawei.com>,
jpoimboe@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, mark.rutland@arm.com,
broonie@kernel.org, nobuta.keiya@fujitsu.com,
sjitindarsingh@gmail.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
will@kernel.org, jamorris@linux.microsoft.com,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
live-patching@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 00/20] arm64: livepatch: Use ORC for dynamic frame pointer validation
Date: Sun, 29 May 2022 10:30:08 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2b8d8fbe-e596-91bf-a63b-938c9ff4140a@linux.microsoft.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <061a4299-114f-96e0-86a4-6ab255778498@huawei.com>
Thanks for taking the time to review my patches.
On 5/24/22 09:24, Chen Zhongjin wrote:
> Hi Madvenka,
>
> I have a brief look at your patch and the idea that using CFA metadata to
> validate FP is reasonable to me. And I found a problem when I used 'pv dump' to
> check the orc value and I replied your commit 11/20 for that.
>
I have responded to that comment in another email. Please take a look.
> I think it's not necessary that you rewrite the arm64 decoder(there is already a
> decoder in my patch) and insn check(objtool check can just make it) by yourself.
>
This is a fair point. I will think about this a little bit and respond to this in a separate email.
> For me it's also a trouble that objtool runs too much unnecessary work. I advise
> that we should move some check for x86 as arch specific and refactor the cmdline
> options, they doesn't turn off everything perfectly now.
>
So, Josh has done what you have mentioned. He has reorganized all of that code.
I am working on syncing up to his changes. I will send out version 3.
> Other than that I have an advise: We only use orc for reliable stacktrace and
> normal FP unwind doesn't depends on it. Should we only load these data for
> livepatch (or other scenario needs reliable stacktrace)? It can save the memory
> and time consuming for kernel.
>
Yes. For ARM64, that is what I am trying to do. STACK_VALIDATION is optional and it
is off by default. It needs to be turned on only if reliable stack trace is required.
> That's all. And if you don't mind, can I incorporate some commit into my set?
> Appreciate for it.
>
Please feel free to use any and all of my code. I am also looking at merging our two
decoders so that there is only one decoder. I need to think about this a little bit.
So, stay tuned.
Thanks!
Madhavan
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-29 15:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <e81e773678f88f7c2ff7480e2eb096973ec198db>
2022-05-24 0:16 ` [RFC PATCH v2 00/20] arm64: livepatch: Use ORC for dynamic frame pointer validation madvenka
2022-05-24 0:16 ` [RFC PATCH v2 01/20] objtool: Reorganize CFI code madvenka
2022-05-24 0:16 ` [RFC PATCH v2 02/20] objtool: Reorganize instruction-related code madvenka
2022-05-24 0:16 ` [RFC PATCH v2 03/20] objtool: Move decode_instructions() to a separate file madvenka
2022-05-24 0:16 ` [RFC PATCH v2 04/20] objtool: Reorganize Unwind hint code madvenka
2022-05-24 0:16 ` [RFC PATCH v2 05/20] objtool: Reorganize ORC types madvenka
2022-05-24 14:27 ` Chen Zhongjin
2022-05-29 15:36 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-05-24 0:16 ` [RFC PATCH v2 06/20] objtool: Reorganize ORC code madvenka
2022-05-24 0:16 ` [RFC PATCH v2 07/20] objtool: Reorganize ORC kernel code madvenka
2022-05-24 0:16 ` [RFC PATCH v2 08/20] objtool: arm64: Implement decoder for FP validation madvenka
2022-05-24 0:16 ` [RFC PATCH v2 09/20] objtool: arm64: Implement command to invoke the decoder madvenka
2022-05-24 14:09 ` Mark Brown
2022-05-29 14:49 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-05-30 7:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-06-01 22:45 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-06-07 18:13 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-05-24 0:16 ` [RFC PATCH v2 10/20] objtool: arm64: Compute destinations for call and jump instructions madvenka
2022-05-24 0:16 ` [RFC PATCH v2 11/20] objtool: arm64: Walk instructions and compute CFI for each instruction madvenka
2022-05-24 13:45 ` Chen Zhongjin
2022-05-29 15:18 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-05-30 1:44 ` Chen Zhongjin
2022-05-24 0:16 ` [RFC PATCH v2 12/20] objtool: arm64: Generate ORC data from CFI for object files madvenka
2022-05-24 0:16 ` [RFC PATCH v2 13/20] objtool: arm64: Dump ORC data present in " madvenka
2022-05-24 0:16 ` [RFC PATCH v2 14/20] objtool: arm64: Add unwind hint support madvenka
2022-05-24 0:16 ` [RFC PATCH v2 15/20] arm64: Add unwind hints to specific points in code madvenka
2022-05-24 0:16 ` [RFC PATCH v2 16/20] arm64: Add kernel and module support for ORC madvenka
2022-05-24 0:16 ` [RFC PATCH v2 17/20] arm64: Build the kernel with ORC information madvenka
2022-05-24 0:16 ` [RFC PATCH v2 18/20] arm64: unwinder: Add a reliability check in the unwinder based on ORC madvenka
2022-05-24 0:16 ` [RFC PATCH v2 19/20] arm64: Miscellaneous changes required for enabling livepatch madvenka
2022-07-01 14:16 ` Miroslav Benes
2022-07-01 19:53 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-05-24 0:16 ` [RFC PATCH v2 20/20] arm64: Enable livepatch for ARM64 madvenka
2022-05-24 14:24 ` [RFC PATCH v2 00/20] arm64: livepatch: Use ORC for dynamic frame pointer validation Chen Zhongjin
2022-05-29 15:30 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman [this message]
2022-06-15 12:18 ` Ivan T. Ivanov
2022-06-15 13:37 ` Mark Rutland
2022-06-15 14:18 ` Ivan T. Ivanov
2022-06-15 20:50 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2022-06-15 20:47 ` 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=2b8d8fbe-e596-91bf-a63b-938c9ff4140a@linux.microsoft.com \
--to=madvenka@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=chenzhongjin@huawei.com \
--cc=jamorris@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=live-patching@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=nobuta.keiya@fujitsu.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sjitindarsingh@gmail.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).