linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de, hpa@zytor.com,
	x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
	Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>,
	xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 04/29] x86: assembly, use ENDPROC for functions
Date: Fri, 12 May 2017 09:53:48 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4c3b765e-483a-4d9b-c451-6eccc02403f3@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170426014217.hshjlweqsimaumuy@treble>

On 04/26/2017, 03:42 AM, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
>> @@ -323,7 +323,7 @@ ENTRY(resume_userspace)
>>  	movl	%esp, %eax
>>  	call	prepare_exit_to_usermode
>>  	jmp	restore_all
>> -END(ret_from_exception)
>> +ENDPROC(ret_from_exception)
> 
> What exactly is the motivation of this patch?  It would be good to
> describe that in the commit message.
> 
> Is the point to allow objtool to generate CFI for it?  If so, I don't
> really see how that would work.  Today, objtool considers ENDPROC to
> annotate a *callable* function which conforms to the C calling ABI and
> can be called by another function.  The stack is in a known state at
> function entry, and so the CFI (or frame pointer info) can be reliably
> determined.

Ugh, I haven't checked this in 100 % of cases, but this looks pretty
fragile to me. From reading the code, the use of END or ENDPROC is
rather random -- depending on mood and who wrote the code.

> But entry code is different.  In most cases, the global symbols aren't
> actually called, and they don't follow any conventions.  The code is
> spaghetti-esque, with HW handlers and jumps everywhere.  The state of
> the stack at symbol entry varies per "function".  That's why objtool
> ignores these files.

Unfortunately, this is true.

> For special cases (like entry code), I was thinking we'd need manual CFI
> annotations, like we had before.  Or maybe there's another way, like
> some new macros which tell objtool about the HW entry points and the
> state of the registers there.
> 
> But I'm having trouble seeing how marking these code snippets with
> ENTRY/ENDPROC would help objtool make any sense of the code and where
> things are on the stack.

Ok, my intention was to have every line of assembly code in between of
FUNC_START/FUNC_END. That way, every rsp related push/pop/sub/add can be
annotated very easily. For the C-like functions this is all what needs
to be done.

Then there is the spaghetti code. And I was thinking about manual
annotations like:

  # skip the frame pointer checking between START+END here
  OBJTOOL(SKIP_CHECKING)

  # this fn has unusual frame (like interrupts have),
    and you can find return RIP stored at fp + 0x20
  OBJTOOL(RIP_IS_AT, 0x20)

  # put this raw CFI for this location into eh_frame
  OBJTOOL(RAW_CFI, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00)


Similarly, I have OBJTOOL(START_FUNC) and OBJTOOL(END_FUNC) emitted with
each FUNC_START/FUNC_END. So far, when manually expanded for simplicity,
it looks like this:

#define OBJTOOL_START_FUNC                              \
        .pushsection .discard.asmfunctions ASM_NL       \
        .long 0xfd111111 ASM_NL                         \
        .long 1f - . ASM_NL                             \
        .popsection ASM_NL                              \
        1:

#define OBJTOOL_END_FUNC                                \
        .pushsection .discard.asmfunctions ASM_NL       \
        .long 0xfe111111 ASM_NL                         \
        .long 1f - . ASM_NL                             \
        .popsection ASM_NL                              \
        1:

0xfd111111, 0xfe111111 are "opcodes" for objtool meaning
START_FUNC/END_FUNC. Similar would be SKIP_CHECKING, RIP_IS_AT, and
RAW_CFI from the above.

So on the objtool side, it looks like:
        switch (data->magic) {
        case 0xfd111111:
                pc_begin = rela->addend;
                break;
        case 0xfe111111:
                ret = dwarf_annotate_func(dwarf, rela->sym->sec,
                                pc_begin, rela->addend - pc_begin);
                if (ret < 0)
                        return -1;

                break;

So this was my idea -- having all code marked as function and manually
annotate those which are different.

thanks,
-- 
js
suse labs

  reply	other threads:[~2017-05-12  7:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-04-21 14:12 [PATCH v3 01/29] x86: boot/copy, remove unused functions Jiri Slaby
2017-04-21 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 02/29] x86_32: boot, extract efi_pe_entry from startup_32 Jiri Slaby
2017-04-21 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 03/29] x86_64: boot, extract efi_pe_entry from startup_64 Jiri Slaby
2017-04-21 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 04/29] x86: assembly, use ENDPROC for functions Jiri Slaby
2017-04-26  1:42   ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-05-12  7:53     ` Jiri Slaby [this message]
2017-05-12 22:15       ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-05-17 13:23         ` Jiri Slaby
2017-05-19  9:17           ` Jiri Slaby
2017-05-19 19:50             ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-04-21 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 05/29] x86: assembly, add ENDPROC to functions Jiri Slaby
2017-04-21 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 06/29] x86: assembly, annotate functions by ENTRY, not GLOBAL Jiri Slaby
2017-04-21 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 07/29] x86: bpf_jit, use ENTRY+ENDPROC Jiri Slaby
2017-04-21 19:32   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2017-04-24  6:45     ` Jiri Slaby
2017-04-24 14:41       ` David Miller
2017-04-24 14:52         ` Jiri Slaby
2017-04-24 15:08           ` David Miller
2017-04-24 15:41             ` Jiri Slaby
2017-04-24 15:51               ` David Miller
2017-04-24 15:53                 ` Jiri Slaby
2017-04-24 15:55               ` Ingo Molnar
2017-04-24 16:02                 ` Jiri Slaby
2017-04-24 16:40                   ` Ingo Molnar
2017-04-24 16:47                   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2017-04-24 17:51                     ` Jiri Slaby
2017-04-24 18:24                       ` David Miller
2017-04-25 14:41                         ` Jiri Slaby
2017-04-21 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 08/29] linkage: new macros for assembler symbols Jiri Slaby
2017-04-21 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 09/29] x86: assembly, use DATA_SIMPLE for data Jiri Slaby
2017-04-27 11:53   ` Pavel Machek
2017-04-27 12:30     ` Jiri Slaby
2017-04-27 12:43       ` Pavel Machek
2017-04-21 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 10/29] x86: assembly, annotate relocate_kernel Jiri Slaby
2017-04-21 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 11/29] x86: entry, annotate THUNKs Jiri Slaby
2017-04-21 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 12/29] x86: assembly, annotate local functions Jiri Slaby
2017-04-21 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 13/29] x86: crypto, " Jiri Slaby
2017-04-21 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 14/29] x86: boot, " Jiri Slaby
2017-04-21 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 15/29] x86: assembly, annotate aliases Jiri Slaby
2017-04-21 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 16/29] x86: entry, annotate interrupt symbols properly Jiri Slaby
2017-04-21 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 17/29] x86: head, annotate data appropriatelly Jiri Slaby
2017-04-21 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 18/29] x86: boot, " Jiri Slaby
2017-04-21 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 19/29] x86: um, " Jiri Slaby
2017-04-21 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 20/29] x86: xen-pvh, " Jiri Slaby
2017-04-21 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 21/29] x86: purgatory, start using annotations Jiri Slaby
2017-04-21 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 22/29] x86: assembly, use SYM_FUNC_INNER_LABEL instead of GLOBAL Jiri Slaby
2017-04-21 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 23/29] x86: realmode, use SYM_DATA_* " Jiri Slaby
2017-04-21 14:13 ` [PATCH v3 24/29] x86: assembly, remove GLOBAL macro Jiri Slaby
2017-04-21 14:13 ` [PATCH v3 25/29] x86: assembly, make some functions local Jiri Slaby
2017-04-21 14:13 ` [PATCH v3 26/29] x86_64: assembly, change all ENTRY to SYM_FUNC_START Jiri Slaby
2017-04-21 14:13 ` [PATCH v3 27/29] x86_32: " Jiri Slaby
2017-04-21 14:13 ` [PATCH v3 28/29] x86_32: lguest, use SYM_ENTRY Jiri Slaby
2017-04-21 14:13 ` [PATCH v3 29/29] x86: assembly, replace WEAK uses Jiri Slaby

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=4c3b765e-483a-4d9b-c451-6eccc02403f3@suse.cz \
    --to=jslaby@suse.cz \
    --cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jgross@suse.com \
    --cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.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).