linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: madvenka@linux.microsoft.com
Cc: mark.rutland@arm.com, jpoimboe@redhat.com, ardb@kernel.org,
	nobuta.keiya@fujitsu.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
	will@kernel.org, jmorris@namei.org, pasha.tatashin@soleen.com,
	jthierry@redhat.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	live-patching@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v5 2/2] arm64: Create a list of SYM_CODE functions, check return PC against list
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2021 17:24:15 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210604162415.GF4045@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210526214917.20099-3-madvenka@linux.microsoft.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1455 bytes --]

On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 04:49:17PM -0500, madvenka@linux.microsoft.com wrote:

> The unwinder should check if the return PC falls in any function that
> is considered unreliable from an unwinding perspective. If it does,
> mark the stack trace unreliable.

Reviwed-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>

However it'd be good for someone else to double check this as it's
entirely possible that I've missed some case here.

> + * Some special cases covered by sym_code_functions[] deserve a mention here:

> + *	- All EL1 interrupt and exception stack traces will be considered
> + *	  unreliable. This is the correct behavior as interrupts and exceptions
> + *	  can happen on any instruction including ones in the frame pointer
> + *	  prolog and epilog. Unless stack metadata is available so the unwinder
> + *	  can unwind through these special cases, such stack traces will be
> + *	  considered unreliable.
> + *

If you're respinning this it's probably also worth noting that we only
ever perform reliable stack trace on either blocked tasks or the current
task which should if my reasoning is correct mean that the fact that
the exclusions here mean that we avoid having to worry about so many
race conditions when entering and leaving functions.  If we got
preempted at the wrong moment for one of them then we should observe the
preemption and mark the trace as unreliable due to that which means that
any confusion the race causes is a non-issue.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2021-06-04 16:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <ea0ef9ed6eb34618bcf468fbbf8bdba99e15df7d>
2021-05-26 21:49 ` [RFC PATCH v5 0/2] arm64: Implement stack trace reliability checks madvenka
2021-05-26 21:49   ` [RFC PATCH v5 1/2] arm64: Introduce stack trace reliability checks in the unwinder madvenka
2021-06-24 14:40     ` Mark Rutland
2021-06-24 16:03       ` Mark Brown
2021-06-25 15:39       ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-06-25 15:51         ` Mark Brown
2021-06-25 17:05           ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-06-25 17:18             ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-06-26 15:35         ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-06-29 16:47       ` Josh Poimboeuf
2021-05-26 21:49   ` [RFC PATCH v5 2/2] arm64: Create a list of SYM_CODE functions, check return PC against list madvenka
2021-06-04 16:24     ` Mark Brown [this message]
2021-06-04 20:38       ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-06-04 16:59     ` Mark Brown
2021-06-04 20:40       ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-06-16  1:52     ` Suraj Jitindar Singh
2021-06-16  9:15       ` nobuta.keiya
2021-06-16 11:10       ` Madhavan T. Venkataraman
2021-06-04 15:29   ` [RFC PATCH v5 0/2] arm64: Implement stack trace reliability checks Mark Brown
2021-06-04 20:44     ` 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=20210604162415.GF4045@sirena.org.uk \
    --to=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=ardb@kernel.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=jmorris@namei.org \
    --cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
    --cc=jthierry@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=live-patching@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=madvenka@linux.microsoft.com \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=nobuta.keiya@fujitsu.com \
    --cc=pasha.tatashin@soleen.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).