linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 00/15] perf: Add backtrace post dwarf unwind

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CABPqkBQbYs7JgGqfZD3ng6QMK0OpiVL=8gfyxn5aRgtYpPVjsw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 29 Mar 2012 17:52:50 -0700
From:	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc:	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>, acme@...hat.com, mingo@...e.hu,
	paulus@...ba.org, cjashfor@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, fweisbec@...il.com,
	gorcunov@...nvz.org, tzanussi@...il.com, mhiramat@...hat.com,
	rostedt@...dmis.org, robert.richter@....com, fche@...hat.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 00/15] perf: Add backtrace post dwarf unwind

On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 5:44 PM, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-03-29 at 17:38 -0700, Stephane Eranian wrote:
>> What I'd like to have is something similar to:
>>     attr->sample_type |= PERF_SAMPLE_REGS
>>     attr->sample_regs = EAX | EBX | EDI | ESI |.....
>>     attr->sample_reg_mode = { INTR, PRECISE, USER }
>>
>> Then in each sample for the event you dump the u64 values
>> of the requested registers.  The order is that of the enum
>> enum regs {}. That enum is arch specific.
>>
>> When you are in precise mode on Intel, you extract the regs
>> from PEBS. You already know the registers supported by PEBS
>> so you can reject any request for  unsupported regs.
>>
>> When you are in intr they you get the regs from pt_regs.
>> The user mode case is taken care of by the this patch series
>> already.
>>
>> I am not sure the sample_reg_mode needs to be a bitmask, i.e.,
>> do we need the reg state for INTR+PRECISE or USER+INTR?
>> But if so, then we would need attr->sample_regs[3] as not all
>> registers may be available in each mode.
>
> I'm really having trouble seeing how useful this is. You mentioned
> sampling function arguments, but most samples would be in the middle of
> functions where the regs are completely unrelated to arguments. Also
> isn't the 'normal' C ABI passing args on stack rather than registers?
>
If you look at the SNB events, you'll see that br_inst_retired:near_call
supports PEBS. The sample is taken at retirement of the call, i.e., the
first instruction of the function, exactly where you want it to be.

Unless I am mistaken, the x86_64 calling convention passes the first 6
integer arguments in registers.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/