[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160112143648.GA310@treble.redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 08:36:48 -0600
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, live-patching@...r.kernel.org,
Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Pedro Alves <palves@...hat.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...il.com>,
Bernd Petrovitsch <bernd@...rovitsch.priv.at>,
Chris J Arges <chris.j.arges@...onical.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v15 21/25] x86/asm: Create stack frames in rwsem functions
On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 01:41:58PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 06:39:35AM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > rwsem.S has several callable non-leaf functions which don't honor
> > CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER, which can result in bad stack traces.
> >
> > Create stack frames for them when CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER is enabled.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
> > ---
> > arch/x86/lib/rwsem.S | 11 ++++++++++-
> > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/lib/rwsem.S b/arch/x86/lib/rwsem.S
> > index 40027db..be110ef 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/lib/rwsem.S
> > +++ b/arch/x86/lib/rwsem.S
> > @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@
> >
> > #include <linux/linkage.h>
> > #include <asm/alternative-asm.h>
> > +#include <asm/frame.h>
> >
> > #define __ASM_HALF_REG(reg) __ASM_SEL(reg, e##reg)
> > #define __ASM_HALF_SIZE(inst) __ASM_SEL(inst##w, inst##l)
> > @@ -84,24 +85,29 @@
> >
> > /* Fix up special calling conventions */
> > ENTRY(call_rwsem_down_read_failed)
> > + FRAME_BEGIN
>
> Remind me again, please, why aren't we hiding those
> FRAME_BEGIN/FRAME_END macros in the ENTRY/ENDPROC ones?
Ingo made a similar suggestion a while back:
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20150717194307.GA26757@gmail.com
But the frame stuff can't be folded into ENTRY/ENDPROC because we don't
need to create a stack frame for *all* functions, but rather only for
non-leaf functions.
So then we considered something like:
FUNCTION_ENTRY(func)
FUNCTION_RETURN(func)
for non-leaf functions, and:
LEAF_FUNCTION_ENTRY(func)
LEAF_FUNCTION_RETURN(func)
for leaf functions.
But that was too inflexible for the case where a function ends with a
jump instead of a return.
> > save_common_regs
> > __ASM_SIZE(push,) %__ASM_REG(dx)
> > movq %rax,%rdi
> > call rwsem_down_read_failed
> > __ASM_SIZE(pop,) %__ASM_REG(dx)
> > restore_common_regs
> > + FRAME_END
> > ret
> > ENDPROC(call_rwsem_down_read_failed)
--
Josh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists