lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Aug]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 1/2] x86/unwind: add ORC unwinder
On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 12:03:51PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 11:58 AM, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > Take for example the lock_is_held_type() function. In vmlinux, it has
> > the following instruction:
> >
> > callq *0xffffffff85a94880 (pv_irq_ops.save_fl)
> >
> > At runtime, that instruction is patched and replaced with a fast inline
> > version of arch_local_save_flags() which eliminates the call:
> >
> > pushfq
> > pop %rax
> >
> > The problem is when an interrupt hits after the push:
> >
> > pushfq
> > --- irq ---
> > pop %rax
>
> That should actually be something easily fixable, for an odd reason:
> the instruction boundaries are different.
>
> > I'm not sure what the solution should be. It will probably need to be
> > one of the following:
> >
> > a) either don't allow runtime "alternative" patches to mess with the
> > stack pointer (objtool could enforce this); or
> >
> > b) come up with some way to register such patches with the ORC
> > unwinder at runtime.
>
> c) just add ORC data for the alternative statically and _unconditionally_.
>
> No runtime registration. Just an unconditional entry for the
> particular IP that comes after the "pushfq". It cannot match the
> "callq" instruction, since it would be in the middle of that
> instruction.
>
> Basically, just do a "union" of the ORC data for all the alternatives.
>
> Now, objtool should still verify that the instruction pointers for
> alternatives are unique - or that they share the same ORC unwinder
> information if they are not.
>
> But in cases like this, when the instruction boundaires are different,
> things should "just work", with no need for any special cases.
>
> Hmm?

Yeah, that might work. Objtool already knows about alternatives, so it
might not be too hard. I'll try it.

And it can spit out a warning if we get two different ORC states for the
same address after doing the "union". Then I guess we'd have to
rearrange things or sprinkle some nops to work around it.

--
Josh

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-08-08 21:15    [W:0.556 / U:0.204 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site