On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 10:51:10 -0600
Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 10:54:38AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 19:06:15 -0600
> > Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 09:20:18AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > > > > > bool
On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 10:54:38AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 19:06:15 -0600
> Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 09:20:18AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > > > > bool unwind_next_frame(struct unwind_state *state)
> > > > > {
> > > > >
On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 19:06:15 -0600
Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 09:20:18AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > > > bool unwind_next_frame(struct unwind_state *state)
> > > > {
> > > > unsigned long ip_p, sp, tmp, orig_ip = state->ip, prev_sp =
> > > > state->sp;
> >
On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 09:20:18AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > > bool unwind_next_frame(struct unwind_state *state)
> > > {
> > > unsigned long ip_p, sp, tmp, orig_ip = state->ip, prev_sp = state->sp;
> > > @@ -536,6 +561,18 @@ bool unwind_next_frame(struct unwind_state *state)
> > >
On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 12:31:13 -0600
Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 12:55:09AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_KRETPROBES
> > +static unsigned long orc_kretprobe_correct_ip(struct unwind_state *state)
> > +{
> > + return kretprobe_find_ret_addr(
> > +
On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 12:55:09AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> Hi Josh and Daniel,
<...>
> commit aa452d999b524b1851f69cc947be3e1a2f3ca1ec
> Author: Masami Hiramatsu
> Date: Sat Mar 6 08:34:51 2021 +0900
>
> x86/unwind/orc: Fixup kretprobe trampoline entry
>
> Since the
On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 12:55:09AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> +#ifdef CONFIG_KRETPROBES
> +static unsigned long orc_kretprobe_correct_ip(struct unwind_state *state)
> +{
> + return kretprobe_find_ret_addr(
> + (unsigned long)kretprobe_trampoline_addr(),
> +
Hi Josh and Daniel,
On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 09:08:45 -0600
Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 06:57:34PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > > If I understand correctly, for #1 you need an unwind hint which treats
> > > the instruction *after* the "pushq %rsp" as the beginning of the
>
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 06:57:34PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > If I understand correctly, for #1 you need an unwind hint which treats
> > the instruction *after* the "pushq %rsp" as the beginning of the
> > function.
>
> Thanks for the patch. In that case, should I still change the stack
On Tue, 9 Mar 2021 13:34:42 -0800
Daniel Xu wrote:
> Hi Masami,
>
> Just want to clarify a few points:
>
> On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 11:52:10AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > On Sun, 7 Mar 2021 13:23:33 -0800
> > Daniel Xu wrote:
> > To help your understanding, let me explain.
> >
> > If
Hi Josh,
On Mon, 8 Mar 2021 19:19:45 -0600
Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 11:52:10AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > So at the kretprobe handler, we have 2 issues.
> > 1) the return address (caller_func+0x15) is not on the stack.
> >this can be solved by searching from
Hi Masami,
Just want to clarify a few points:
On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 11:52:10AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Mar 2021 13:23:33 -0800
> Daniel Xu wrote:
> To help your understanding, let me explain.
>
> If we have a code here
>
> caller_func:
> 0x00 add sp, 0x20 /* 0x20
On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 11:52:10AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> So at the kretprobe handler, we have 2 issues.
> 1) the return address (caller_func+0x15) is not on the stack.
>this can be solved by searching from current->kretprobe_instances.
> 2) the stack frame size of
On Mon, 8 Mar 2021 11:52:10 +0900
Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> So, here is my idea;
>
> 1) Change the trampline code to prepare stack frame at first and save
>registers on it, instead of "push". This will makes ORC easy to setup
>stackframe information for this code.
> 2) change the return
On Sun, 7 Mar 2021 13:23:33 -0800
Daniel Xu wrote:
> > kretprobe replaces the real return address with kretprobe_trampoline
> > and kretprobe_trampoline *calls* trampoline_handler (this part depends
> > on architecture implementation).
> > Thus, if kretprobe_trampoline has no stack frame
On Sat, Mar 06, 2021 at 10:13:57AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Mar 2021 11:16:45 -0800
> Daniel Xu wrote:
>
> > Hi Masami,
> >
> > On Sat, Mar 06, 2021 at 12:38:57AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > Here is a series of patches for kprobes and stacktracer
On Fri, 5 Mar 2021 11:16:45 -0800
Daniel Xu wrote:
> Hi Masami,
>
> On Sat, Mar 06, 2021 at 12:38:57AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Here is a series of patches for kprobes and stacktracer to fix the kretprobe
> > entries in the kernel stack. This was reported by Daniel Xu.
Hi Masami,
On Sat, Mar 06, 2021 at 12:38:57AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Here is a series of patches for kprobes and stacktracer to fix the kretprobe
> entries in the kernel stack. This was reported by Daniel Xu. I thought that
> was in the bpftrace, but it is actually more
Hello,
Here is a series of patches for kprobes and stacktracer to fix the kretprobe
entries in the kernel stack. This was reported by Daniel Xu. I thought that
was in the bpftrace, but it is actually more generic issue.
So I decided to fix the issue in arch independent part.
While fixing the
19 matches
Mail list logo
