From: madvenka@linux.microsoft.com To: mark.rutland@arm.com, 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, madvenka@linux.microsoft.com Subject: [PATCH v9 07/11] arm64: Call stack_backtrace() only from within walk_stackframe() Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2021 21:34:11 -0500 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20211015023413.16614-10-madvenka@linux.microsoft.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20211015023413.16614-1-madvenka@linux.microsoft.com> From: "Madhavan T. Venkataraman" <madvenka@linux.microsoft.com> Currently, arch_stack_walk() calls start_backtrace() and walk_stackframe() separately. There is no need to do that. Instead, call start_backtrace() from within walk_stackframe(). In other words, walk_stackframe() is the only unwind function a consumer needs to call. Currently, the only consumer is arch_stack_walk(). In the future, arch_stack_walk_reliable() will be another consumer. start_backtrace(), unwind_frame() and walk_stackframe() are only used within arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c. Make them static and remove them from arch/arm64/include/asm/stacktrace.h. Currently, there is a check for a NULL task in unwind_frame(). It is not needed since all current consumers pass a non-NULL task. Use struct stackframe only within the unwind functions. Signed-off-by: Madhavan T. Venkataraman <madvenka@linux.microsoft.com> --- arch/arm64/include/asm/stacktrace.h | 6 ---- arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c | 51 ++++++++++++++++------------- 2 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/stacktrace.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/stacktrace.h index 8aebc00c1718..c239f357d779 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/stacktrace.h +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/stacktrace.h @@ -61,9 +61,6 @@ struct stackframe { #endif }; -extern int unwind_frame(struct task_struct *tsk, struct stackframe *frame); -extern void walk_stackframe(struct task_struct *tsk, struct stackframe *frame, - bool (*fn)(void *, unsigned long), void *data); extern void dump_backtrace(struct pt_regs *regs, struct task_struct *tsk, const char *loglvl); @@ -148,7 +145,4 @@ static inline bool on_accessible_stack(const struct task_struct *tsk, return false; } -void start_backtrace(struct stackframe *frame, unsigned long fp, - unsigned long pc); - #endif /* __ASM_STACKTRACE_H */ diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c index 776c4debb5a7..7d32cee9ef4b 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c @@ -33,8 +33,8 @@ */ -void start_backtrace(struct stackframe *frame, unsigned long fp, - unsigned long pc) +static void start_backtrace(struct stackframe *frame, unsigned long fp, + unsigned long pc) { frame->fp = fp; frame->pc = pc; @@ -63,14 +63,12 @@ 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. */ -int notrace unwind_frame(struct task_struct *tsk, struct stackframe *frame) +static int notrace unwind_frame(struct task_struct *tsk, + struct stackframe *frame) { unsigned long fp = frame->fp; struct stack_info info; - if (!tsk) - tsk = current; - /* Final frame; nothing to unwind */ if (fp == (unsigned long)task_pt_regs(tsk)->stackframe) return -ENOENT; @@ -136,15 +134,21 @@ int notrace unwind_frame(struct task_struct *tsk, struct stackframe *frame) } NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(unwind_frame); -void notrace walk_stackframe(struct task_struct *tsk, struct stackframe *frame, - bool (*fn)(void *, unsigned long), void *data) +static void notrace walk_stackframe(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); + while (1) { int ret; - if (!fn(data, frame->pc)) + if (!fn(data, frame.pc)) break; - ret = unwind_frame(tsk, frame); + ret = unwind_frame(tsk, &frame); if (ret < 0) break; } @@ -190,19 +194,22 @@ noinline notrace void arch_stack_walk(stack_trace_consume_fn consume_entry, void *cookie, struct task_struct *task, struct pt_regs *regs) { - struct stackframe frame; + unsigned long fp, pc; + + if (regs) { + fp = regs->regs[29]; + pc = regs->pc; + } else if (task == current) { + /* Skip arch_stack_walk() in the stack trace. */ + fp = (unsigned long)__builtin_frame_address(1); + pc = (unsigned long)__builtin_return_address(0); + } else { + /* Caller guarantees that the task is not running. */ + fp = thread_saved_fp(task); + pc = thread_saved_pc(task); + } + walk_stackframe(task, fp, pc, consume_entry, cookie); - if (regs) - start_backtrace(&frame, regs->regs[29], regs->pc); - else if (task == current) - start_backtrace(&frame, - (unsigned long)__builtin_frame_address(1), - (unsigned long)__builtin_return_address(0)); - else - start_backtrace(&frame, thread_saved_fp(task), - thread_saved_pc(task)); - - walk_stackframe(task, &frame, consume_entry, cookie); } #endif -- 2.25.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-15 2:35 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top [not found] <c05ce30dcc9be1bd6b5e24a2ca8fe1d66246980b> 2021-10-15 2:34 ` [PATCH v9 00/11] arm64: Reorganize the unwinder and implement stack trace reliability checks madvenka 2021-10-15 2:34 ` [PATCH v9 01/11] arm64: Select STACKTRACE in arch/arm64/Kconfig madvenka 2021-10-15 2:34 ` [PATCH v9 10/11] arm64: Introduce stack trace reliability checks in the unwinder madvenka 2021-10-15 2:34 ` [PATCH v9 11/11] arm64: Create a list of SYM_CODE functions, check return PC against list madvenka 2021-10-15 2:34 ` [PATCH v9 02/11] arm64: Make perf_callchain_kernel() use arch_stack_walk() madvenka 2021-10-15 2:34 ` [PATCH v9 03/11] arm64: Make get_wchan() " madvenka 2021-10-15 2:34 ` [PATCH v9 04/11] arm64: Make return_address() " madvenka 2021-10-15 2:34 ` [PATCH v9 05/11] arm64: Make dump_stacktrace() " madvenka 2021-10-15 2:34 ` [PATCH v9 06/11] arm64: Make profile_pc() " madvenka 2021-10-15 2:34 ` madvenka [this message] 2021-10-15 2:34 ` [PATCH v9 08/11] arm64: Rename unwinder functions, prevent them from being traced and kprobed madvenka 2021-10-15 2:34 ` [PATCH v9 09/11] arm64: Make the unwind loop in unwind() similar to other architectures madvenka 2021-10-15 2:53 ` [PATCH v9 00/11] arm64: Reorganize the unwinder and implement stack trace reliability checks Madhavan T. Venkataraman 2021-10-15 2:58 ` [PATCH v10 " madvenka 2021-10-15 2:58 ` [PATCH v10 01/11] arm64: Select STACKTRACE in arch/arm64/Kconfig madvenka 2021-10-15 18:28 ` Mark Brown 2021-10-21 12:28 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman 2021-10-22 18:02 ` Mark Rutland 2021-11-12 17:44 ` Mark Rutland 2021-11-14 16:15 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman 2021-10-15 2:58 ` [PATCH v10 02/11] arm64: Make perf_callchain_kernel() use arch_stack_walk() madvenka 2021-10-20 14:59 ` Mark Brown 2021-10-21 12:28 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman 2021-10-22 18:11 ` Mark Rutland 2021-10-23 12:49 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman 2021-10-15 2:58 ` [PATCH v10 03/11] arm64: Make get_wchan() " madvenka 2021-10-20 16:10 ` Mark Brown 2021-10-21 12:30 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman 2021-10-15 2:58 ` [PATCH v10 04/11] arm64: Make return_address() " madvenka 2021-10-20 15:03 ` Mark Brown 2021-10-21 12:29 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman 2021-10-22 18:51 ` Mark Rutland 2021-10-23 12:51 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman 2021-10-15 2:58 ` [PATCH v10 05/11] arm64: Make dump_stacktrace() " madvenka 2021-10-25 16:49 ` Mark Rutland 2021-10-26 12:05 ` Mark Rutland 2021-10-27 16:09 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman 2021-10-15 2:58 ` [PATCH v10 06/11] arm64: Make profile_pc() " madvenka 2021-10-25 2:18 ` nobuta.keiya 2021-10-27 16:10 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman 2021-10-27 13:32 ` Mark Rutland 2021-10-27 16:15 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman 2021-10-15 2:58 ` [PATCH v10 07/11] arm64: Call stack_backtrace() only from within walk_stackframe() madvenka 2021-10-15 2:58 ` [PATCH v10 08/11] arm64: Rename unwinder functions, prevent them from being traced and kprobed madvenka 2021-10-27 17:53 ` Mark Rutland 2021-10-27 20:07 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman 2021-10-15 2:58 ` [PATCH v10 09/11] arm64: Make the unwind loop in unwind() similar to other architectures madvenka 2021-10-15 2:58 ` [PATCH v10 10/11] arm64: Introduce stack trace reliability checks in the unwinder madvenka 2021-11-04 12:39 ` nobuta.keiya 2021-11-10 3:13 ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman 2021-10-15 2:58 ` [PATCH v10 11/11] arm64: Create a list of SYM_CODE functions, check return PC against list madvenka 2021-10-15 17:00 ` [PATCH v10 00/11] arm64: Reorganize the unwinder and implement stack trace reliability checks 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=20211015023413.16614-10-madvenka@linux.microsoft.com \ --to=madvenka@linux.microsoft.com \ --cc=ardb@kernel.org \ --cc=broonie@kernel.org \ --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \ --cc=jmorris@namei.org \ --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=sjitindarsingh@gmail.com \ --cc=will@kernel.org \ --subject='Re: [PATCH v9 07/11] arm64: Call stack_backtrace() only from within walk_stackframe()' \ /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
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).