Re: [RFC PATCH v3 00/11] powerpc: Add support for ftrace direct and BPF trampolines

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Vishal,

Vishal Chourasia wrote:
On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 12:24:03AM +0530, Naveen N Rao wrote:
This is v3 of the patches posted here:
http://lkml.kernel.org/r/cover.1718008093.git.naveen@xxxxxxxxxx

Since v2, I have addressed review comments from Steven and Masahiro along with a few fixes. Patches 7-11 are new in this series and add support for ftrace direct and bpf trampolines. This series depends on the patch series from Benjamin Gray adding support for patch_ulong():
http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240515024445.236364-1-bgray@xxxxxxxxxxxxx


- Naveen

Hello Naveen,

I've noticed an issue with `kstack()` in bpftrace [1] when using `kfunc` compared to `kprobe`. Despite trying all three modes specified in the documentation (bpftrace, perf, or raw), the stack isn't unwinding properly with `kfunc`.
[1] https://github.com/bpftrace/bpftrace/blob/master/man/adoc/bpftrace.adoc#kstack


for mode in modes; do
	run bpftrace with kfunc
	disable cpu
	kill bpftrace
	run bpftrace with kprobe
	enable cpu
	kill bpftrace

# ./kprobe_vs_kfunc.sh
+ bpftrace -e 'kfunc:vmlinux:build_sched_domains {@[kstack(bpftrace), comm, tid]=count();}'
Attaching 1 probe...
+ chcpu -d 2-3
CPU 2 disabled
CPU 3 disabled
+ kill 35214

@[
    bpf_prog_cfd8d6c8bb4898ce+972
, cpuhp/2, 33]: 1
@[
    bpf_prog_cfd8d6c8bb4898ce+972
, cpuhp/3, 38]: 1

Yeah, this is because we don't capture the full register state with bpf trampolines unlike with kprobes. BPF stackmap relies on perf_arch_fetch_caller_regs() to create a dummy pt_regs for use by get_perf_callchain(). We end up with a NULL LR, and bpftrace (and most other userspace tools) stop showing the backtrace when they encounter a NULL entry. I recall fixing some tools to continue to show backtrace inspite of a NULL entry, but I may be mis-remembering.

Perhaps we should fix/change how the perf callchain is captured in the kernel. We filter out invalid entries, and capture an additional entry for perf since we can't be sure of our return address. We should revisit this and see if we can align with the usual expectations of a callchain not having a NULL entry. Something like this may help, but this needs more testing especially on the perf side:

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/perf/callchain.c b/arch/powerpc/perf/callchain.c
index 6b4434dd0ff3..9f67b764da92 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/perf/callchain.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/perf/callchain.c
@@ -83,12 +83,12 @@ perf_callchain_kernel(struct perf_callchain_entry_ctx *entry, struct pt_regs *re
                        * We can't tell which of the first two addresses
                        * we get are valid, but we can filter out the
                        * obviously bogus ones here.  We replace them
-                        * with 0 rather than removing them entirely so
+                        * with -1 rather than removing them entirely so
                        * that userspace can tell which is which.
                        */
                       if ((level == 1 && next_ip == lr) ||
                           (level <= 1 && !kernel_text_address(next_ip)))
-                               next_ip = 0;
+                               next_ip = -1;

                       ++level;
		}


- Naveen






[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux