[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZUPVbrMSNNwPw_B-@FVFF77S0Q05N.cambridge.arm.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2023 16:59:26 +0000
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@...il.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>,
Song Liu <song@...nel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>,
Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Zi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@...il.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/1] bpf, arm64: support exceptions
On Sun, Sep 17, 2023 at 12:00:45AM +0000, Puranjay Mohan wrote:
> Implement arch_bpf_stack_walk() for the ARM64 JIT. This will be used
> by bpf_throw() to unwind till the program marked as exception boundary and
> run the callback with the stack of the main program.
>
> The prologue generation code has been modified to make the callback
> program use the stack of the program marked as exception boundary where
> callee-saved registers are already pushed.
>
> As the bpf_throw function never returns, if it clobbers any callee-saved
> registers, they would remain clobbered. So, the prologue of the
> exception-boundary program is modified to push R23 and R24 as well,
> which the callback will then recover in its epilogue.
>
> The Procedure Call Standard for the Arm 64-bit Architecture[1] states
> that registers r19 to r28 should be saved by the callee. BPF programs on
> ARM64 already save all callee-saved registers except r23 and r24. This
> patch adds an instruction in prologue of the program to save these
> two registers and another instruction in the epilogue to recover them.
>
> These extra instructions are only added if bpf_throw() used. Otherwise
> the emitted prologue/epilogue remains unchanged.
>
> [1] https://github.com/ARM-software/abi-aa/blob/main/aapcs64/aapcs64.rst
>
> Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@...il.com>
> ---
[...]
> +void arch_bpf_stack_walk(bool (*consume_fn)(void *cookie, u64 ip, u64 sp, u64 bp), void *cookie)
> +{
> + struct stack_info stacks[] = {
> + stackinfo_get_task(current),
> + };
Can bpf_throw() only be used by BPF programs that run in task context, or is it
possible e.g. for those to run within an IRQ handler (or otherwise on the IRQ
stack)?
> +
> + struct unwind_state state = {
> + .stacks = stacks,
> + .nr_stacks = ARRAY_SIZE(stacks),
> + };
> + unwind_init_common(&state, current);
> + state.fp = (unsigned long)__builtin_frame_address(1);
> + state.pc = (unsigned long)__builtin_return_address(0);
> +
> + if (unwind_next_frame_record(&state))
> + return;
> + while (1) {
> + /* We only use the fp in the exception callback. Pass 0 for sp as it's unavailable*/
> + if (!consume_fn(cookie, (u64)state.pc, 0, (u64)state.fp))
> + break;
> + if (unwind_next_frame_record(&state))
> + break;
> + }
> +}
IIUC you're not using arch_stack_walk() because you need the FP in addition to
the PC.
Is there any other reason you need to open-code this?
If not, I'd rather rework the common unwinder so that it's possible to get at
the FP. I had patches for that a while back:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mark/linux.git/log/?h=arm64/stacktrace/metadata
... and I'm happy to rebase that and pull out the minimum necessary to make
that possible.
Mark.
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/DENYLIST.aarch64 b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/DENYLIST.aarch64
> index f5065576cae9..7f768d335698 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/DENYLIST.aarch64
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/DENYLIST.aarch64
> @@ -1,6 +1,5 @@
> bpf_cookie/multi_kprobe_attach_api # kprobe_multi_link_api_subtest:FAIL:fentry_raw_skel_load unexpected error: -3
> bpf_cookie/multi_kprobe_link_api # kprobe_multi_link_api_subtest:FAIL:fentry_raw_skel_load unexpected error: -3
> -exceptions # JIT does not support calling kfunc bpf_throw: -524
> fexit_sleep # The test never returns. The remaining tests cannot start.
> kprobe_multi_bench_attach # bpf_program__attach_kprobe_multi_opts unexpected error: -95
> kprobe_multi_test/attach_api_addrs # bpf_program__attach_kprobe_multi_opts unexpected error: -95
> --
> 2.40.1
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists