[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b89bcb68-d010-4041-aacf-15b934675705@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2024 19:20:08 +0100
From: Jens Remus <jremus@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>, x86@...nel.org
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Indu Bhagat <indu.bhagat@...cle.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
linux-toolchains@...r.kernel.org, Jordan Rome <jordalgo@...a.com>,
Sam James <sam@...too.org>, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kerne.org,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>, Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/19] x86/vdso: Enable sframe generation in VDSO
On 28.10.2024 22:47, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> Enable sframe generation in the VDSO library so kernel and user space
> can unwind through it.
...
Applying similar changes to s390 and using the current binutils release without SFrame support on s390 results in build errors.
AFAIK the kernel has a minimum binutils requirement of 2.25 [1] and the assembler option "--gsframe was introduced with 2.40.
> diff --git a/arch/x86/entry/vdso/Makefile b/arch/x86/entry/vdso/Makefile
> index c9216ac4fb1e..75ae9e093a2d 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/entry/vdso/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/x86/entry/vdso/Makefile
> @@ -47,13 +47,15 @@ quiet_cmd_vdso2c = VDSO2C $@
> $(obj)/vdso-image-%.c: $(obj)/vdso%.so.dbg $(obj)/vdso%.so $(obj)/vdso2c FORCE
> $(call if_changed,vdso2c)
>
> +SFRAME_CFLAGS := $(call as-option,-Wa$(comma)-gsframe,)
I have the impression this test might not work as expected. On s390 the assembler accepts option --gsframe and only generates an error when the assembler code actually contains any CFI directives:
$ cat test-nocfi.a
la %r1,42
$ as --gsframe test-nocfi.a
$ echo $?
0
$ cat test-cfi.a
.cfi_startproc
.cfi_endproc
$ as --gsframe test-cfi.a
test-cfi.a: Assembler messages:
test-cfi.a: Error: .sframe not supported for target
$ echo $?
1
But the following assembler code triggers an error:
$ cat test-sframe.a
.cfi_sections .sframe
.cfi_startproc
.cfi_endproc
$ as test-sframe.a
test-sframe.a: Assembler messages:
test-sframe.a: Error: .sframe not supported for target
$ echo $?
1
Maybe the following would be an alternative test in the Makefile?
SFRAME_CFLAGS := $(call as-instr,.cfi_sections .sframe\n.cfi_startproc\n.cfi_endproc,-DCONFIG_AS_SFRAME=1)
ifneq ($(SFRAME_CFLAGS),)
SFRAME_CFLAGS += -Wa,--gsframe
endif
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/dwarf2.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/dwarf2.h
> index b1aa3fcd5bca..1a49492817a1 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/dwarf2.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/dwarf2.h
> @@ -12,8 +12,11 @@
> * For the vDSO, emit both runtime unwind information and debug
> * symbols for the .dbg file.
> */
> -
> +#ifdef __x86_64__
#if defined(__x86_64__) && defined(CONFIG_AS_SFRAME)
> + .cfi_sections .eh_frame, .debug_frame, .sframe
> +#else
> .cfi_sections .eh_frame, .debug_frame
> +#endif
>
> #define CFI_STARTPROC .cfi_startproc
> #define CFI_ENDPROC .cfi_endproc
[1]: https://docs.kernel.org/process/changes.html
Regards,
Jens
--
Jens Remus
Linux on Z Development (D3303) and z/VSE Support
+49-7031-16-1128 Office
jremus@...ibm.com
IBM
IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH; Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Wolfgang Wendt; Geschäftsführung: David Faller; Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen; Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 243294
IBM Data Privacy Statement: https://www.ibm.com/privacy/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists