linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: llvm@lists.linux.dev, Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] recordmcount: Handle sections with no non-weak symbols
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2022 13:15:22 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1651129169.fpixr00hgx.naveen@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220427095415.594e5120@gandalf.local.home>

Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Apr 2022 15:01:22 +0530
> "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
>> If one or both of these weak functions are overridden in future, in the
>> final vmlinux mcount table, references to these will change over to the
>> non-weak variant which has its own mcount location entry. As such, there
>> will now be two entries for these functions, both pointing to the same
>> non-weak location.
> 
> But is that really true in all cases? x86 uses fentry these days, and other
> archs do things differently too. But the original mcount (-pg) call
> happened *after* the frame setup. That means the offset of the mcount call
> would be at different offsets wrt the start of the function. If you have
> one of these architectures that still use mcount, and the weak function
> doesn't have the same size frame setup as the overriding function, then the
> addresses will not be the same.

Indeed, plain old -pg will be a problem. I'm not sure there is a generic 
way to address this. I suppose architectures will have to validate the 
mcount locations, something like this?

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/ftrace.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/ftrace.h
index d83758acd1c7c3..d8b104ed2fdf38 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/ftrace.h
+++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/ftrace.h
@@ -12,13 +12,7 @@
 
 #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
 extern void _mcount(void);
-
-static inline unsigned long ftrace_call_adjust(unsigned long addr)
-{
-       /* relocation of mcount call site is the same as the address */
-       return addr;
-}
-
+unsigned long ftrace_call_adjust(unsigned long addr);
 unsigned long prepare_ftrace_return(unsigned long parent, unsigned long ip,
                                    unsigned long sp);
 
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/trace/ftrace.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/trace/ftrace.c
index 4ee04aacf9f13c..976c08cd0573f7 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/trace/ftrace.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/trace/ftrace.c
@@ -858,6 +858,17 @@ void arch_ftrace_update_code(int command)
        ftrace_modify_all_code(command);
 }
 
+unsigned long ftrace_call_adjust(unsigned long addr)
+{
+       ppc_inst_t op = ppc_inst_read((u32 *)addr);
+
+       if (!is_bl_op(op))
+               return 0;
+
+       /* relocation of mcount call site is the same as the address */
+       return addr;
+}
+
 #ifdef CONFIG_PPC64
 #define PACATOC offsetof(struct paca_struct, kernel_toc)
 

We can tighten those checks as necessary, but it will be upto the 
architectures to validate the mcount locations. This all will have to be 
opt-in so that only architectures doing necessary validation will allow 
mcount relocations against weak symbols.


- Naveen

  reply	other threads:[~2022-04-28  7:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-04-27  9:31 [PATCH 0/2] ftrace/recordmcount: Handle object files without section symbols Naveen N. Rao
2022-04-27  9:31 ` [PATCH 1/2] ftrace: Drop duplicate mcount locations Naveen N. Rao
2022-04-27 13:46   ` Steven Rostedt
2022-04-27  9:31 ` [PATCH 2/2] recordmcount: Handle sections with no non-weak symbols Naveen N. Rao
2022-04-27 13:54   ` Steven Rostedt
2022-04-28  7:45     ` Naveen N. Rao [this message]
2022-04-28 14:06       ` Steven Rostedt
2022-04-28 17:24         ` Naveen N. Rao
2022-04-28 17:31         ` Naveen N. Rao
2022-05-02 14:44         ` Christophe Leroy
2022-05-02 23:52           ` Steven Rostedt
2022-05-03 11:20             ` Christophe Leroy
2022-05-03 16:25               ` Steven Rostedt
2022-05-04 16:50                 ` Christophe Leroy
2022-05-04 17:06                   ` Steven Rostedt
2022-05-04 17:10                     ` Christophe Leroy
2022-08-16 14:04 ` [PATCH 0/2] ftrace/recordmcount: Handle object files without section symbols Steven Rostedt
2022-08-16 17:05   ` Naveen N. Rao

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=1651129169.fpixr00hgx.naveen@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=nathan@kernel.org \
    --cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.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).