On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 10:32 PM Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, 23 Aug 2021 22:12:06 -0700 > Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 4:35 PM Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 23:05:56 +0900 > > > Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > This is the 10th version of the series to fix the stacktrace with kretprobe on x86. > > > > > > > > The previous version is here; > > > > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/162601048053.1318837.1550594515476777588.stgit@devnote2/ > > > > > > > > This version is rebased on top of new kprobes cleanup series(*1) and merging > > > > Josh's objtool update series (*2)(*3) as [6/16] and [7/16]. > > > > > > > > (*1) https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/162748615977.59465.13262421617578791515.stgit@devnote2/ > > > > (*2) https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210710192433.x5cgjsq2ksvaqnss@treble/ > > > > (*3) https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210710192514.ghvksi3ozhez4lvb@treble/ > > > > > > > > Changes from v9: > > > > - Add Josh's objtool update patches with a build error fix as [6/16] and [7/16]. > > > > - Add a API document for kretprobe_find_ret_addr() and check cur != NULL in [5/16]. > > > > > > > > With this series, unwinder can unwind stack correctly from ftrace as below; > > > > > > > > # cd /sys/kernel/debug/tracing > > > > # echo > trace > > > > # echo 1 > options/sym-offset > > > > # echo r vfs_read >> kprobe_events > > > > # echo r full_proxy_read >> kprobe_events > > > > # echo traceoff:1 > events/kprobes/r_vfs_read_0/trigger > > > > # echo stacktrace:1 > events/kprobes/r_full_proxy_read_0/trigger > > > > # echo 1 > events/kprobes/enable > > > > # cat /sys/kernel/debug/kprobes/list > > > > ffffffff8133b740 r full_proxy_read+0x0 [FTRACE] > > > > ffffffff812560b0 r vfs_read+0x0 [FTRACE] > > > > # echo 0 > events/kprobes/enable > > > > # cat trace > > > > # tracer: nop > > > > # > > > > # entries-in-buffer/entries-written: 3/3 #P:8 > > > > # > > > > # _-----=> irqs-off > > > > # / _----=> need-resched > > > > # | / _---=> hardirq/softirq > > > > # || / _--=> preempt-depth > > > > # ||| / delay > > > > # TASK-PID CPU# |||| TIMESTAMP FUNCTION > > > > # | | | |||| | | > > > > <...>-134 [007] ...1 16.185877: r_full_proxy_read_0: (vfs_read+0x98/0x180 <- full_proxy_read) > > > > <...>-134 [007] ...1 16.185901: <stack trace> > > > > => kretprobe_trace_func+0x209/0x300 > > > > => kretprobe_dispatcher+0x4a/0x70 > > > > => __kretprobe_trampoline_handler+0xd4/0x170 > > > > => trampoline_handler+0x43/0x60 > > > > => kretprobe_trampoline+0x2a/0x50 > > > > => vfs_read+0x98/0x180 > > > > => ksys_read+0x5f/0xe0 > > > > => do_syscall_64+0x37/0x90 > > > > => entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae > > > > <...>-134 [007] ...1 16.185902: r_vfs_read_0: (ksys_read+0x5f/0xe0 <- vfs_read) > > > > > > > > This shows the double return probes (vfs_read() and full_proxy_read()) on the stack > > > > correctly unwinded. (vfs_read() returns to 'ksys_read+0x5f' and full_proxy_read() > > > > returns to 'vfs_read+0x98') > > > > > > > > This also changes the kretprobe behavisor a bit, now the instraction pointer in > > > > the 'pt_regs' passed to kretprobe user handler is correctly set the real return > > > > address. So user handlers can get it via instruction_pointer() API, and can use > > > > stack_trace_save_regs(). > > > > > > > > You can also get this series from > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mhiramat/linux.git kprobes/kretprobe-stackfix-v9 > > > > > > Oops, this is of course 'kprobes/kretprobe-stackfix-v10'. And this branch includes above (*1) series. > > > > Hi Masami, > > > > Was this ever merged/applied? This is a very important functionality > > for BPF kretprobes, so I hope this won't slip through the cracks. > > No, not yet as far as I know. > I'm waiting for any comment on this series. Since this is basically > x86 ORC unwinder improvement, this series should be merged to -tip tree. > Hey Masami, It's been a while since you posted v10. It seems like this series doesn't apply cleanly anymore. Do you mind rebasing and resubmitting it again to refresh the series and make it easier for folks to review and test it? Also, do I understand correctly that [0] is a dependency of this series? If yes, please rebase and resubmit that one as well. Not sure on the status of Josh's patches you have dependency on as well. Can you please coordinate with him and maybe incorporate them into your series? Please also cc Paul McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx> for the future revisions so he can follow along as well? Thanks! [0] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=522757&state=* > Ingo and Josh, > > Could you give me any comment, please? > > Thank you, > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > Thank you, > > > > > > -- > > > Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > -- > Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx>
