Received: by 2002:ac0:a5a7:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id m36-v6csp595109imm; Fri, 17 Aug 2018 03:28:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA+uWPyScDVqqbpeenGhwh18ydOT++9P9z/BFSXM9w8TjQ7RlmrCzhl/e5LOyElG/q1tpxmuyZjJ X-Received: by 2002:a63:d04f:: with SMTP id s15-v6mr33141558pgi.42.1534501687358; Fri, 17 Aug 2018 03:28:07 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1534501687; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=I8vCRvvN0rg8tR+dKmjgsd1dch2mE6PZpIAAmjLhq9B0AQFzaZV9o+UYv4UpqDTMEQ VEE/p+pHfQl2UAyE0m6+yPdDMuKUwbGjbofrDLOnsZPJwxUcQwbbA5MKDIuk1qiZx3cI 1de/L/uSU/TH/durTZKsS3tZWNXbdt940+nqf9u8f+xHKS89dcPfAM8f7suYhnqsXq0s CaFrHfUAUst8D+KDMio9sTyhhuVGgiUVT4QxYnJo91WHUFoPtkKYlfN2FoYiVNz6c++5 MG7uKt2QiivXR9i4bt8VqYuSF6w8DDRVSAs1BN7shsH4zHApvN+ORLdiyw0MSjSPiHky wp+A== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:from:date:message-id:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:arc-authentication-results; bh=YmMKdVCqIp9uVtssFVQSsrWpn/0VJuy9VQarEf6hL/8=; b=uEXCB5kBJZMTl98CnhXRp+uEnr67gNijw5PqKFDb3Ox6oXqM9VPYCJlmNLVNc2Qk8q i4D56gMjHXAcXHzCF6uYkNRy6AQu1z5YyzIpqgTq7wztqCt+xk9YPG0GtxFKfZ7NCSBe jPF9yXcyYCBFsN9yUhIseoVXNOXHOyAvqR5JdF9GfxwClShtGW5HB8R52qCSrEzopgLq uqdseu48Y6XQBMuWZp44iiwGAufQjlm1rNApTD60ClFA1m20lWsw1THD+yqMK6Y+6OEy toZzoUMKhojMnr7UaA6TkXTOEQuv7AZw4m2SierD9a6pGpcj07aeFJs8j9CSMTr5gAzl pPFQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id b1-v6si2021258pli.54.2018.08.17.03.27.52; Fri, 17 Aug 2018 03:28:07 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726818AbeHQN3Y (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 17 Aug 2018 09:29:24 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:36097 "EHLO newverein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726280AbeHQN3Y (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Aug 2018 09:29:24 -0400 Received: by newverein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2005) id B777568EF6; Fri, 17 Aug 2018 12:27:33 +0200 (CEST) To: Will Deacon , Catalin Marinas , Julien Thierry , Steven Rostedt , Josh Poimboeuf , Ingo Molnar , Ard Biesheuvel , Arnd Bergmann , AKASHI Takahiro Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, live-patching@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH v2 3/3] arm64: reliable stacktraces In-Reply-To: <20180817102544.C628D68EF4@newverein.lst.de> References: <20180817102544.C628D68EF4@newverein.lst.de> Message-Id: <20180817102733.B777568EF6@newverein.lst.de> Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2018 12:27:33 +0200 (CEST) From: duwe@lst.de (Torsten Duwe) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org This is more an RFC in the original sense: is this basically the correct approach? (as I had to tweak the save_stack API a bit). In particular the code does not detect interrupts and exception frames, and does not yet check whether the code address is valid. The latter check would also have to be omitted for the latest frame on other tasks' stacks. This would require some more tweaking. unwind_frame() now reports whether we had to stop normally or due to an error condition; walk_stackframe() will pass that info. __save_stack_trace() is used for a start to check the validity of a frame; maybe save_stack_trace_tsk_reliable() will need its own callback. The question is whether this change, once complete, is sufficient (as on powerpc) or whether a port of objtool is needed, like x86. I can dig into this myself and draw conclusions, but I'd prefer to have some input from ARM people here... Signed-off-by: Torsten Duwe --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig @@ -127,8 +127,9 @@ config ARM64 select HAVE_PERF_EVENTS select HAVE_PERF_REGS select HAVE_PERF_USER_STACK_DUMP - select HAVE_REGS_AND_STACK_ACCESS_API select HAVE_RCU_TABLE_FREE + select HAVE_REGS_AND_STACK_ACCESS_API + select HAVE_RELIABLE_STACKTRACE select HAVE_STACKPROTECTOR select HAVE_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINTS select HAVE_KPROBES --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/stacktrace.h +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/stacktrace.h @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ struct stackframe { }; extern int unwind_frame(struct task_struct *tsk, struct stackframe *frame); -extern void walk_stackframe(struct task_struct *tsk, struct stackframe *frame, +extern int walk_stackframe(struct task_struct *tsk, struct stackframe *frame, int (*fn)(struct stackframe *, void *), void *data); extern void dump_backtrace(struct pt_regs *regs, struct task_struct *tsk); diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c index d5718a060672..fe0dd4745ff3 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c @@ -81,23 +81,27 @@ int notrace unwind_frame(struct task_struct *tsk, struct stackframe *frame) * both are NULL. */ if (!frame->fp && !frame->pc) - return -EINVAL; + return 1; return 0; } -void notrace walk_stackframe(struct task_struct *tsk, struct stackframe *frame, +int notrace walk_stackframe(struct task_struct *tsk, struct stackframe *frame, int (*fn)(struct stackframe *, void *), void *data) { while (1) { int ret; - if (fn(frame, data)) - break; + ret = fn(frame, data); + if (ret) + return ret; ret = unwind_frame(tsk, frame); if (ret < 0) + return ret; + if (ret > 0) break; } + return 0; } #ifdef CONFIG_STACKTRACE @@ -145,14 +149,15 @@ void save_stack_trace_regs(struct pt_regs *regs, struct stack_trace *trace) trace->entries[trace->nr_entries++] = ULONG_MAX; } -static noinline void __save_stack_trace(struct task_struct *tsk, +static noinline int __save_stack_trace(struct task_struct *tsk, struct stack_trace *trace, unsigned int nosched) { struct stack_trace_data data; struct stackframe frame; + int ret; if (!try_get_task_stack(tsk)) - return; + return -EBUSY; data.trace = trace; data.skip = trace->skip; @@ -171,11 +176,12 @@ static noinline void __save_stack_trace(struct task_struct *tsk, frame.graph = tsk->curr_ret_stack; #endif - walk_stackframe(tsk, &frame, save_trace, &data); + ret = walk_stackframe(tsk, &frame, save_trace, &data); if (trace->nr_entries < trace->max_entries) trace->entries[trace->nr_entries++] = ULONG_MAX; put_task_stack(tsk); + return ret; } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(save_stack_trace_tsk); @@ -190,4 +196,12 @@ void save_stack_trace(struct stack_trace *trace) } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(save_stack_trace); + +int save_stack_trace_tsk_reliable(struct task_struct *tsk, + struct stack_trace *trace) +{ + return __save_stack_trace(tsk, trace, 1); +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(save_stack_trace_tsk_reliable); + #endif