[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <34b9892d-c091-7b83-d8e8-79c0ff813140@fb.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 17:51:55 -0700
From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
CC: rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
kernel-team <kernel-team@...com>,
linux-api <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 bpf-next 08/11] bpf: introduce BPF_RAW_TRACEPOINT
On 3/27/18 5:44 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> ----- On Mar 27, 2018, at 8:00 PM, Alexei Starovoitov ast@...com wrote:
>
>> On 3/27/18 4:13 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>>> ----- On Mar 27, 2018, at 6:48 PM, Alexei Starovoitov ast@...com wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 3/27/18 2:04 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS
>>>>> +#define BPF_RAW_TP() . = ALIGN(8); \
>>>
>>> Given that the section consists of a 16-bytes structure elements
>>> on architectures with 8 bytes pointers, this ". = ALIGN(8)" should
>>> be turned into a STRUCT_ALIGN(), especially given that the compiler
>>> is free to up-align the structure on 32 bytes.
>>
>> STRUCT_ALIGN fixed the 'off by 8' issue with kasan,
>> but it fails without kasan too.
>> For some reason the whole region __start__bpf_raw_tp - __stop__bpf_raw_tp
>> comes inited with cccc:
>> [ 22.703562] i 1 btp ffffffff8288e530 btp->tp cccccccccccccccc func
>> cccccccccccccccc
>> [ 22.704638] i 2 btp ffffffff8288e540 btp->tp cccccccccccccccc func
>> cccccccccccccccc
>> [ 22.705599] i 3 btp ffffffff8288e550 btp->tp cccccccccccccccc func
>> cccccccccccccccc
>> [ 22.706551] i 4 btp ffffffff8288e560 btp->tp cccccccccccccccc func
>> cccccccccccccccc
>> [ 22.707503] i 5 btp ffffffff8288e570 btp->tp cccccccccccccccc func
>> cccccccccccccccc
>> [ 22.708452] i 6 btp ffffffff8288e580 btp->tp cccccccccccccccc func
>> cccccccccccccccc
>> [ 22.709406] i 7 btp ffffffff8288e590 btp->tp cccccccccccccccc func
>> cccccccccccccccc
>> [ 22.710368] i 8 btp ffffffff8288e5a0 btp->tp cccccccccccccccc func
>> cccccccccccccccc
>>
>> while gdb shows that everything is good inside vmlinux
>> for exactly these addresses.
>> Some other linker magic missing?
>
> No, Steven's iteration code is incorrect.
>
> +extern struct bpf_raw_event_map __start__bpf_raw_tp;
> +extern struct bpf_raw_event_map __stop__bpf_raw_tp;
>
> That should be:
>
> extern struct bpf_raw_event_map __start__bpf_raw_tp[];
> extern struct bpf_raw_event_map __stop__bpf_raw_tp[];
>
>
> +
> +struct bpf_raw_event_map *bpf_find_raw_tracepoint(const char *name)
> +{
> + const struct bpf_raw_event_map *btp = &__start__bpf_raw_tp;
>
> const struct bpf_raw_event_map *btp = __start__bpf_raw_tp;
>
> + int i = 0;
> +
> + for (; btp < &__stop__bpf_raw_tp; btp++) {
>
> for (; btp < __stop__bpf_raw_tp; btp++) {
>
> Those start/stop symbols are given their address by the linker
> automatically (this is a GNU linker extension). We don't want
> pointers to the symbols, but rather the symbols per se to act
> as start/stop addresses.
right. that part I fixed first.
Turned out it was in init.data section and got poisoned.
this fixes it:
@@ -258,6 +258,7 @@
LIKELY_PROFILE() \
BRANCH_PROFILE() \
TRACE_PRINTKS() \
+ BPF_RAW_TP() \
TRACEPOINT_STR()
/*
@@ -585,7 +586,6 @@
*(.init.rodata) \
FTRACE_EVENTS() \
TRACE_SYSCALLS() \
- BPF_RAW_TP() \
KPROBE_BLACKLIST() \
ERROR_INJECT_WHITELIST() \
MEM_DISCARD(init.rodata) \
and it works :)
I will clean few other nits I found while debugging and respin.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists