Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-29601-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20231205085959.32177-1-zong.li@sifive.com> <CANXhq0r6A48q+ehayaURLO6snDEjzVJO6Ti+1we-57i0ORT9yg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANXhq0qqv3MBEt8zsWBT+gkdyt1PD4ZjDSrznEotdFM7M7K+yQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CANXhq0qqv3MBEt8zsWBT+gkdyt1PD4ZjDSrznEotdFM7M7K+yQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Zong Li <zong.li@sifive.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2024 08:50:08 +0800
Message-ID: <CANXhq0qNA5JO1xZLbuL6ig1Ddws0m2azMwCyqLFgN3B0VZmvEw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] riscv: add CALLER_ADDRx support
To: palmer@dabbelt.com, Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>, paul.walmsley@sifive.com, 
	aou@eecs.berkeley.edu, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, 
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 11:33=E2=80=AFAM Zong Li <zong.li@sifive.com> wrote=
:
>
> On Fri, Dec 29, 2023 at 2:34=E2=80=AFPM Zong Li <zong.li@sifive.com> wrot=
e:
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 5:00=E2=80=AFPM Zong Li <zong.li@sifive.com> wro=
te:
> > >
> > > CALLER_ADDRx returns caller's address at specified level, they are us=
ed
> > > for several tracers. These macros eventually use
> > > __builtin_return_address(n) to get the caller's address if arch doesn=
't
> > > define their own implementation.
> > >
> > > In RISC-V, __builtin_return_address(n) only works when n =3D=3D 0, we=
 need
> > > to walk the stack frame to get the caller's address at specified leve=
l.
> > >
> > > data.level started from 'level + 3' due to the call flow of getting
> > > caller's address in RISC-V implementation. If we don't have additiona=
l
> > > three iteration, the level is corresponding to follows:
> > >
> > > callsite -> return_address -> arch_stack_walk -> walk_stackframe
> > > |           |                 |                  |
> > > level 3     level 2           level 1            level 0
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Zong Li <zong.li@sifive.com>
> > > ---
> > >  arch/riscv/include/asm/ftrace.h    |  5 ++++
> > >  arch/riscv/kernel/Makefile         |  2 ++
> > >  arch/riscv/kernel/return_address.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=
++
> > >  3 files changed, 55 insertions(+)
> > >  create mode 100644 arch/riscv/kernel/return_address.c
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/ftrace.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm=
/ftrace.h
> > > index 2b2f5df7ef2c..42777f91a9c5 100644
> > > --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/ftrace.h
> > > +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/ftrace.h
> > > @@ -25,6 +25,11 @@
> > >
> > >  #define ARCH_SUPPORTS_FTRACE_OPS 1
> > >  #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
> > > +
> > > +extern void *return_address(unsigned int level);
> > > +
> > > +#define ftrace_return_address(n) return_address(n)
> > > +
> > >  void MCOUNT_NAME(void);
> > >  static inline unsigned long ftrace_call_adjust(unsigned long addr)
> > >  {
> > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/Makefile b/arch/riscv/kernel/Makefile
> > > index fee22a3d1b53..40d054939ae2 100644
> > > --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/Makefile
> > > +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/Makefile
> > > @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ ifdef CONFIG_FTRACE
> > >  CFLAGS_REMOVE_ftrace.o =3D $(CC_FLAGS_FTRACE)
> > >  CFLAGS_REMOVE_patch.o  =3D $(CC_FLAGS_FTRACE)
> > >  CFLAGS_REMOVE_sbi.o    =3D $(CC_FLAGS_FTRACE)
> > > +CFLAGS_REMOVE_return_address.o =3D $(CC_FLAGS_FTRACE)
> > >  endif
> > >  CFLAGS_syscall_table.o +=3D $(call cc-option,-Wno-override-init,)
> > >  CFLAGS_compat_syscall_table.o +=3D $(call cc-option,-Wno-override-in=
it,)
> > > @@ -46,6 +47,7 @@ obj-y +=3D irq.o
> > >  obj-y  +=3D process.o
> > >  obj-y  +=3D ptrace.o
> > >  obj-y  +=3D reset.o
> > > +obj-y  +=3D return_address.o
> > >  obj-y  +=3D setup.o
> > >  obj-y  +=3D signal.o
> > >  obj-y  +=3D syscall_table.o
> > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/return_address.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/r=
eturn_address.c
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 000000000000..c2008d4aa6e5
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/return_address.c
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
> > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
> > > +/*
> > > + * This code come from arch/arm64/kernel/return_address.c
> > > + *
> > > + * Copyright (C) 2023 SiFive.
> > > + */
> > > +
> > > +#include <linux/export.h>
> > > +#include <linux/kprobes.h>
> > > +#include <linux/stacktrace.h>
> > > +
> > > +struct return_address_data {
> > > +       unsigned int level;
> > > +       void *addr;
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +static bool save_return_addr(void *d, unsigned long pc)
> > > +{
> > > +       struct return_address_data *data =3D d;
> > > +
> > > +       if (!data->level) {
> > > +               data->addr =3D (void *)pc;
> > > +               return false;
> > > +       }
> > > +
> > > +       --data->level;
> > > +
> > > +       return true;
> > > +}
> > > +NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(save_return_addr);
> > > +
> > > +void *return_address(unsigned int level)
> > > +{
> > > +       struct return_address_data data;
> > > +
> > > +       data.level =3D level + 3;
> > > +       data.addr =3D NULL;
> > > +
> > > +       arch_stack_walk(save_return_addr, &data, current, NULL);
> > > +
> > > +       if (!data.level)
> > > +               return data.addr;
> > > +       else
> > > +               return NULL;
> > > +
> > > +}
> > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(return_address);
> > > +NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(return_address);
> > > --
> > > 2.17.1
> > >
> >
> > Hi Palmer and all,
> > I was wondering whether this patch is good for everyone? Thanks
>
> Hi Palmer,
> Is there any chance to include this patch in 6.8-rc1? Thanks

Hi Palmer,
I'm not sure if this patch is a feature or bug fix, would you consider
it for 6.8-rcX? Thanks