Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
IronPort-SDR: gaVE7B71bqR7IuBD5Ms5tlKGqQGRPhpfvMPRuDSKYOi5+rIaTpjPQlHc86bbRJlLmc6g6NBVme
 ch7iHLasTk/A==
IronPort-SDR: tBl+yN1PD9XcwxdAGbq0xniZ49uCwAQ4ukB+smLqBDRoLXRsopap3LyS3IYK2v0YTFPormJYSz
 am0AUMiVKbVg==
Date:   Thu, 18 Jun 2020 15:35:55 -0700
From:   Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
To:     Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Kan Liang <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>,
        Francis Ricci <fjricci@fb.com>
Subject: Re: WARNING with LBR + precise_ip=2 + bpf_get_stackid()
Message-ID: <20200618223555.GB793265@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
References: <ED7B9430-6489-4260-B3C5-9CFA2E3AA87A@fb.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ED7B9430-6489-4260-B3C5-9CFA2E3AA87A@fb.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

> We noticed that this only happens with precise_ip >= 2. This is caused by 
> setup_pebs_fixed_sample_data() using pens->real_ip:
> 
> 	set_linear_ip(regs, pebs->real_ip);

With precise_ip == 1 the IP will be one instruction behind.
That's the only difference to 2 or 3.

So something about the actual instruction confuses the unwinder.

I would check if there is anything special about these IPs:

> 0xfffffe00004d1f78 entry_SYSCALL_64
> 0xfffffe00004d1fa0 entry_SYSCALL_64
> 0xfffffe00004d1fd8 entry_SYSCALL_64

> 
> For our use case, we do need precise_ip=2. So we would like suggestions to fix the
> warning and/or to avoid double fault. 

As a minimum, I would just add an && !in_nmi() to the warning. Clearly
it doesn't make sense to print a warning that overflows the stack.

-Andi