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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_NEOMUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABB51C32789 for ; Fri, 2 Nov 2018 15:43:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4217A2081F for ; Fri, 2 Nov 2018 15:43:34 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 4217A2081F Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727803AbeKCAvC (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Nov 2018 20:51:02 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:42798 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726229AbeKCAvC (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Nov 2018 20:51:02 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 90267394D3C; Fri, 2 Nov 2018 15:43:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from treble (ovpn-123-155.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.123.155]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 187F860BF1; Fri, 2 Nov 2018 15:43:27 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2018 10:43:26 -0500 From: Josh Poimboeuf To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Aleksa Sarai , "Naveen N. Rao" , Anil S Keshavamurthy , "David S. Miller" , Masami Hiramatsu , Jonathan Corbet , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Alexander Shishkin , Jiri Olsa , Namhyung Kim , Shuah Khan , Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Brendan Gregg , Christian Brauner , Aleksa Sarai , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] kretprobe: produce sane stack traces Message-ID: <20181102154325.bt6xoysl4xdl33wd@treble> References: <20181101083551.3805-1-cyphar@cyphar.com> <20181101083551.3805-2-cyphar@cyphar.com> <20181101204720.6ed3fe37@vmware.local.home> <20181102050509.tw3dhvj5urudvtjl@yavin> <20181102065932.bdt4pubbrkvql4mp@yavin> <20181102091658.1bc979a4@gandalf.local.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181102091658.1bc979a4@gandalf.local.home> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.13 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.38]); Fri, 02 Nov 2018 15:43:32 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 09:16:58AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Fri, 2 Nov 2018 17:59:32 +1100 > Aleksa Sarai wrote: > > > As an aside, I just tested with the frame unwinder and it isn't thrown > > off-course by kretprobe_trampoline (though obviously the stack is still > > wrong). So I think we just need to hook into the ORC unwinder to get it > > to continue skipping up the stack, as well as add the rewriting code for > > the stack traces (for all unwinders I guess -- though ideally we should > > I agree that this is the right solution. Sounds good to me. However, it would be *really* nice if function graph and kretprobes shared the same infrastructure, like they do for function entry. There's a lot of duplicated effort there. > > do this without having to add the same code to every architecture). > > True, and there's an art to consolidating the code between > architectures. > > I'm currently looking at function graph and seeing if I can consolidate > it too. And I'm also trying to get multiple uses to hook into its > infrastructure. I think I finally figured out a way to do so. > > The reason it is difficult, is that you need to maintain state between > the entry of a function and the exit for each task and callback that is > registered. Hence, it's a 3x tuple (function stack, task, callbacks). > And this must be maintained with preemption. A task may sleep for > minutes, and the state needs to be retained. > > The only state that must be retained is the function stack with the > task, because if that gets out of sync, the system crashes. But the > callback state can be removed. > > Here's what is there now: > > When something is registered with the function graph tracer, every > task gets a shadowed stack. A hook is added to fork to add shadow > stacks to new tasks. Once a shadow stack is added to a task, that > shadow stack is never removed until the task exits. > > When the function is entered, the real return code is stored in the > shadow stack and the trampoline address is put in its place. > > On return, the trampoline is called, and it will pop off the return > code from the shadow stack and return to that. > > The issue with multiple users, is that different users may want to > trace different functions. On entry, the user could say it doesn't want > to trace the current function, and the return part must not be called > on exit. Keeping track of which user needs the return called is the > tricky part. > > Here's what I plan on implementing: > > Along with a shadow stack, I was going to add a 4096 byte (one page) > array that holds 64 8 byte masks to every task as well. This will allow > 64 simultaneous users (which is rather extreme). If we need to support > more, we could allocate another page for all tasks. The 8 byte mask > will represent each depth (allowing to do this for 64 function call > stack depth, which should also be enough). > > Each user will be assigned one of the masks. Each bit in the mask > represents the depth of the shadow stack. When a function is called, > each user registered with the function graph tracer will get called > (if they asked to be called for this function, via the ftrace_ops > hashes) and if they want to trace the function, then the bit is set in > the mask for that stack depth. > > When the function exits the function and we pop off the return code > from the shadow stack, we then look at all the bits set for the > corresponding users, and call their return callbacks, and ignore > anything that is not set. > > > When a user is unregistered, it the corresponding bits that represent > it are cleared, and it the return callback will not be called. But the > tasks being traced will still have their shadow stack to allow it to > get back to normal. > > I'll hopefully have a prototype ready by plumbers. Why do we need multiple users? It would be a lot simpler if we could just enforce a single user per fgraphed/kretprobed function (and return -EBUSY if it's already being traced/probed). > And this too will require each architecture to probably change. As a > side project to this, I'm going to try to consolidate the function > graph code among all the architectures as well. Not an easy task. Do you mean implementing HAVE_FUNCTION_GRAPH_RET_ADDR_PTR for all the arches? If so, I think have an old crusty patch which attempted to that. I could try to dig it up if you're interested. -- Josh