[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160708154824.ikq45dgk2auigqn7@treble>
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 10:48:24 -0500
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc: Torsten Duwe <duwe@....de>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, takahiro.akashi@...aro.org,
Jungseok Lee <jungseoklee85@...il.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Li Bin <huawei.libin@...wei.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Christopher Li <sparse@...isli.org>,
Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>, andrew.wafaa@....com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
live-patching@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-sparse@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] arm64: implement FTRACE_WITH_REGS
On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 05:24:21PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Fri 2016-07-08 17:07:09, Torsten Duwe wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 04:58:00PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > > On Mon 2016-06-27 17:17:17, Torsten Duwe wrote:
> > > > Once gcc is enhanced to optionally generate NOPs at the beginning
> > > > of each function, like the concept proven in
> > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-04/msg01671.html
> > > > (sans the "fprintf (... pad_size);", which spoils the data structure
> > > > for kernel use), the generated pads can nicely be used to reroute
> > > > function calls for tracing/profiling, or live patching.
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/ftrace.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/ftrace.c
> > > > index ebecf9a..917065c 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/ftrace.c
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/ftrace.c
> > > > @@ -39,6 +39,12 @@ static int ftrace_modify_code(unsigned long pc, u32 old, u32 new,
> > > > if (aarch64_insn_read((void *)pc, &replaced))
> > > > return -EFAULT;
> > > >
> > > > + /* If we already have what we'll finally want,
> > > > + * report success. This is needed on startup.
> > > > + */
> > > > + if (replaced == new)
> > > > + return 0;
> > >
> > > This looks strange. I wonder if it actually hides a real bug that we
> > > modify the code twice or so.
> >
> > Not at all. All "profilers" we abused so far generate code that needs to
> > be disabled on boot first. prolog-pad generates nops, initially.
>
> Yeah, but I cannot find this kind of check in other architectures.
> I checked arch/x86/kernel/ftrace.c, arch/s390/kernel/ftrace.c, and
> arch/powerpc/kernel/ftrace.c. These all support ftrace with
> regs and livepatching.
My understanding is that other arches don't need this check because they
use -mfentry, so they have to modify the "call fentry" instruction to a
nop on startup.
Here, with -fprolog-pad, it's already a nop, so no change is needed.
--
Josh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists