From: Suraj Jitindar Singh <sjitindarsingh@gmail.com>
To: madvenka@linux.microsoft.com, broonie@kernel.org,
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: Tue, 15 Jun 2021 18:52:01 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <712b44d2af8f8cd3199aad87eb3bc94ea22d6f4a.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210526214917.20099-3-madvenka@linux.microsoft.com>
On Wed, 2021-05-26 at 16:49 -0500, madvenka@linux.microsoft.com wrote:
> From: "Madhavan T. Venkataraman" <madvenka@linux.microsoft.com>
>
> 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.
>
[snip]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but do you not need to move the final frame
check to before the unwinder_is_unreliable() call?
Userland threads which have ret_from_fork as the last entry on the
stack will always be marked unreliable as they will always have a
SYM_CODE entry on their stack (the ret_from_fork).
Also given that this means the last frame has been reached and as such
there's no more unwinding to do, I don't think we care if the last pc
is a code address.
- Suraj
> *
> @@ -133,7 +236,20 @@ int notrace unwind_frame(struct task_struct
> *tsk, struct stackframe *frame)
> * - Foreign code (e.g. EFI runtime services)
> * - Procedure Linkage Table (PLT) entries and veneer
> functions
> */
> - if (!__kernel_text_address(frame->pc))
> + if (!__kernel_text_address(frame->pc)) {
> + frame->reliable = false;
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * If the final frame has been reached, there is no more
> unwinding
> + * to do. There is no need to check if the return PC is
> considered
> + * unreliable by the unwinder.
> + */
> + if (!frame->fp)
> + return 0;
if (frame->fp == (unsigned long)task_pt_regs(tsk)->stackframe)
return -ENOENT;
> +
> + if (unwinder_is_unreliable(frame->pc))
> frame->reliable = false;
>
> return 0;
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S
> b/arch/arm64/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S
> index 7eea7888bb02..32e8d57397a1 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S
> @@ -103,6 +103,12 @@ jiffies = jiffies_64;
> #define TRAMP_TEXT
> #endif
>
> +#define SYM_CODE_FUNCTIONS \
> + . = ALIGN(16); \
> + __sym_code_functions_start = .; \
> + KEEP(*(sym_code_functions)) \
> + __sym_code_functions_end = .;
> +
> /*
> * The size of the PE/COFF section that covers the kernel image,
> which
> * runs from _stext to _edata, must be a round multiple of the
> PE/COFF
> @@ -218,6 +224,7 @@ SECTIONS
> CON_INITCALL
> INIT_RAM_FS
> *(.init.altinstructions .init.bss) /* from the
> EFI stub */
> + SYM_CODE_FUNCTIONS
> }
> .exit.data : {
> EXIT_DATA
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-16 1:52 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
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 [this message]
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=712b44d2af8f8cd3199aad87eb3bc94ea22d6f4a.camel@gmail.com \
--to=sjitindarsingh@gmail.com \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=broonie@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).