linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 12/39] unwind_user: Add frame pointer support

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250424094102.0004f8f8@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2025 09:41:02 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>
Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>, x86@...nel.org, Peter
 Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.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.kernel.org, Jens Remus
 <jremus@...ux.ibm.com>, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
 Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
 Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, Weinan Liu <wnliu@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 12/39] unwind_user: Add frame pointer support

On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 10:16:10 -0800
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org> wrote:

> > Do you plan to reuse this logic for stack unwinding done by perf
> > subsystem in perf_callchain_user()? See is_uprobe_at_func_entry()
> > parts and also fixup_uretprobe_trampoline_entries() for some of the
> > quirks that have to be taken into account when doing frame
> > pointer-based unwinding. It would be great not to lose those in this
> > new reimplementation.
> > 
> > Not sure what's the best way to avoid duplicating the logic, but I
> > thought I'd bring that up.  
> 
> Indeed!  That was on the todo list and somehow evaporated.

I'm getting ready to post an update of these patches, but I want to mention
that this has not been addressed, and I'm replying here to make sure it
stays on the radar.

-- Steve