Indu Bhagat <[email protected]> writes: > On 2/12/25 11:25 PM, Song Liu wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 6:45 PM Josh Poimboeuf <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 06:36:04PM -0800, Song Liu wrote: >>>>>> [ 81.261748] copy_process+0xfdc/0xfd58 [livepatch_special_static] >>>>> >>>>> Does that copy_process+0xfdc/0xfd58 resolve to this line in >>>>> copy_process()? >>>>> >>>>> refcount_inc(¤t->signal->sigcnt); >>>>> >>>>> Maybe the klp rela reference to 'current' is bogus, or resolving to the >>>>> wrong address somehow? >>>> >>>> It resolves the following line. >>>> >>>> p->signal->tty = tty_kref_get(current->signal->tty); >>>> >>>> I am not quite sure how 'current' should be resolved. >>> >>> Hm, on arm64 it looks like the value of 'current' is stored in the >>> SP_EL0 register. So I guess that shouldn't need any relocations. >>> >>>> The size of copy_process (0xfd58) is wrong. It is only about >>>> 5.5kB in size. Also, the copy_process function in the .ko file >>>> looks very broken. I will try a few more things. >> >> When I try each step of kpatch-build, the copy_process function >> looks reasonable (according to gdb-disassemble) in fork.o and >> output.o. However, copy_process looks weird in livepatch-special-static.o, >> which is generated by ld: >> >> ld -EL -maarch64linux -z norelro -z noexecstack >> --no-warn-rwx-segments -T ././kpatch.lds -r -o >> livepatch-special-static.o ./patch-hook.o ./output.o >> >> I have attached these files to the email. I am not sure whether >> the email server will let them through. >> >> Indu, does this look like an issue with ld? >> > > Sorry for the delay. > > Looks like there has been progress since and issue may be elsewhere, but: > > FWIW, I looked at the .sframe and .rela.sframe sections here, the data > does look OK. I noted that there is no .sframe for copy_process () in > output.o... I will take a look into it.
Hi Indu,
I saw another issue in my kernel build with sframes enabled (-Wa,--gsframe):
ld: warning: orphan section `.init.sframe' from
`arch/arm64/kernel/pi/lib-fdt.pi.o' being placed in section `.init.sframe'
[... Many more similar warnings (.init.sframe) ...]
So, this orphan sections is generated in the build process.
I am using GNU ld version 2.41-50 and gcc (GCC) 11.4.1
Is this section needed for sframes to work? or can we discard
.init.sframe section with a patch like following to the linker script:
-- 8< --
diff --git a/include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h
b/include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h
index 6a437bd08..8e704c0a6 100644
--- a/include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h
+++ b/include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h
@@ -1044,9 +1044,16 @@ defined(CONFIG_AUTOFDO_CLANG) ||
defined(CONFIG_PROPELLER_CLANG)
# define SANITIZER_DISCARDS
#endif
+#if defined(CONFIG_SFRAME_UNWIND_TABLE)
+#define DISCARD_INIT_SFRAME *(.init.sframe)
+#else
+#define DISCARD_INIT_SFRAME
+#endif
+
#define COMMON_DISCARDS
\
SANITIZER_DISCARDS \
PATCHABLE_DISCARDS \
+ DISCARD_INIT_SFRAME \
*(.discard) \
*(.discard.*) \
*(.export_symbol) \
-- >8 --
Thanks,
Puranjay
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

