On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 3:37 PM Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 6:27 AM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Mon, May 03, 2021 at 03:32:34PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > > > On Sun, May 2, 2021 at 2:17 PM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 11:28:34PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote: > > > > > For functions with variable arguments like: > > > > > > > > > > void set_worker_desc(const char *fmt, ...) > > > > > > > > > > the BTF data contains void argument at the end: > > > > > > > > > > [4061] FUNC_PROTO '(anon)' ret_type_id=0 vlen=2 > > > > > 'fmt' type_id=3 > > > > > '(anon)' type_id=0 > > > > > > > > > > When attaching function with this void argument the btf_distill_func_proto > > > > > will set last btf_func_model's argument with size 0 and that > > > > > will cause extra loop in save_regs/restore_regs functions and > > > > > generate trampoline code like: > > > > > > > > > > 55 push %rbp > > > > > 48 89 e5 mov %rsp,%rbp > > > > > 48 83 ec 10 sub $0x10,%rsp > > > > > 53 push %rbx > > > > > 48 89 7d f0 mov %rdi,-0x10(%rbp) > > > > > 75 f8 jne 0xffffffffa00cf007 > > > > > ^^^ extra jump > > > > > > > > > > It's causing soft lockups/crashes probably depends on what context > > > > > is the attached function called, like for set_worker_desc: > > > > > > > > > > watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#16 stuck for 22s! [kworker/u40:4:239] > > > > > CPU: 16 PID: 239 Comm: kworker/u40:4 Not tainted 5.12.0-rc4qemu+ #178 > > > > > Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.14.0-1.fc33 04/01/2014 > > > > > Workqueue: writeback wb_workfn > > > > > RIP: 0010:bpf_trampoline_6442464853_0+0xa/0x1000 > > > > > Code: Unable to access opcode bytes at RIP 0xffffffffa3597fe0. > > > > > RSP: 0018:ffffc90000687da8 EFLAGS: 00000217 > > > > > Call Trace: > > > > > set_worker_desc+0x5/0xb0 > > > > > wb_workfn+0x48/0x4d0 > > > > > ? psi_group_change+0x41/0x210 > > > > > ? __bpf_prog_exit+0x15/0x20 > > > > > ? bpf_trampoline_6442458903_0+0x3b/0x1000 > > > > > ? update_pasid+0x5/0x90 > > > > > ? __switch_to+0x187/0x450 > > > > > process_one_work+0x1e7/0x380 > > > > > worker_thread+0x50/0x3b0 > > > > > ? rescuer_thread+0x380/0x380 > > > > > kthread+0x11b/0x140 > > > > > ? __kthread_bind_mask+0x60/0x60 > > > > > ret_from_fork+0x22/0x30 > > > > > > > > > > This patch is removing the void argument from struct btf_func_model > > > > > in btf_distill_func_proto, but perhaps we should also check for this > > > > > in JIT's save_regs/restore_regs functions. > > > > > > > > actualy looks like we need to disable functions with variable arguments > > > > completely, because we don't know how many arguments to save > > > > > > > > I tried to disable them in pahole and it's easy fix, will post new fix > > > > > > Can we still allow access to fixed arguments for such functions and > > > just disallow the vararg ones? > > > > the problem is that we should save all the registers for arguments, > > which is probably doable.. but if caller uses more than 6 arguments, > > we need stack data, which will be wrong because of the extra stack > > frame we do in bpf trampoline.. so we could crash > > > > the patch below prevents to attach these functions directly in kernel, > > so we could keep these functions in BTF > > > > jirka > > > > > > --- > > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/btf.c b/kernel/bpf/btf.c > > index 0600ed325fa0..f9709dc08c44 100644 > > --- a/kernel/bpf/btf.c > > +++ b/kernel/bpf/btf.c > > @@ -5213,6 +5213,13 @@ int btf_distill_func_proto(struct bpf_verifier_log *log, > > tname, i, btf_kind_str[BTF_INFO_KIND(t->info)]); > > return -EINVAL; > > } > > + if (ret == 0) { > > + bpf_log(log, > > + "The function %s has variable args, it's unsupported.\n", > > + tname); > > + return -EINVAL; > > + > > + } > > this will work, but the explicit check for vararg should be `i == > nargs - 1 && args[i].type == 0`. Everything else (if it happens) is > probably a bad BTF data. Jiri, could you please resubmit with the check like Andrii suggested? Thanks!