Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] static_call: Add static call infrastructure

[Steven Rostedt]

On Fri, 9 Nov 2018 14:34:59 -0600
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I'm slowly massaging this to work with tracepoints.

But I hit a snag on this patch.

> On Fri, Nov 09, 2018 at 02:57:46PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Fri, 9 Nov 2018 13:35:05 -0600
> > Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> >   
> > > > > +#define DECLARE_STATIC_CALL(key, func)					\
> > > > > +	extern struct static_call_key key;				\
> > > > > +	extern typeof(func) STATIC_CALL_TRAMP(key);			\
> > > > > +	/* Preserve the ELF symbol so objtool can access it: */		\
> > > > > +	__ADDRESSABLE(key)    
> > > > 
> > > > Does the __ADDRESSABLE(key) need to be in the DECLARE part?
> > > > If so, there needs to be more explanation than just the comment above
> > > > it.    
> > > 
> > > For each call site, objtool creates a struct in .static_call_sites:
> > > 
> > > 	struct static_call_site {
> > > 		s32 addr;
> > > 		s32 key;
> > > 	};
> > > 
> > > In order to do that, it needs to create a relocation which references
> > > the key symbol.  If the key is defined in another .o file, then the
> > > current .o will not have an ELF symbol associated with the key.  The
> > > __ADDRESSABLE(key) thing tells GCC to leave the key symbol in the .o
> > > file, even though it's not referenced anywhere.  That makes objtool's
> > > job easier, so it doesn't have to edit the symbol table.
> > > 
> > > I could add a comment saying as much, though it's hard to explain it in
> > > fewer words than I just did :-)  
> > 
> > Does this have to do with adding the references by relative address?
> > 
> > In record_mcount, I just picked an existing symbol and referenced that..
> > But perhaps this is a cleaner way.  
> 
> I think recordmcount is different.  It creates references (in
> __mcount_loc) to functions which are already in the object file, so they
> already have symbols associated with them.
> 
> But in this case, when objtool is creating references, the symbol it
> needs to reference is outside the .o file, so there's no symbol to
> associate it with.
> 

The __ADDRESSABLE() appears to fail if you have a header with a
DECLARE_STATIC_CALL() that is included where the DEFINE_STATIC_CALL()
is, because I'm getting this:

In file included from <command-line>:
/work/git/linux-trace.git/include/linux/compiler.h:285:11: error: redefinition of â__addressable___tp_func_sys_enter40â
   __PASTE(__addressable_##sym, __LINE__) = (void *)&sym;
           ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
/work/git/linux-trace.git/include/linux/compiler_types.h:53:23: note: in definition of macro â___PASTEâ
 #define ___PASTE(a,b) a##b
                       ^
/work/git/linux-trace.git/include/linux/compiler.h:285:3: note: in expansion of macro â__PASTEâ
   __PASTE(__addressable_##sym, __LINE__) = (void *)&sym;
   ^~~~~~~
/work/git/linux-trace.git/include/linux/static_call.h:112:2: note: in expansion of macro â__ADDRESSABLEâ
  __ADDRESSABLE(key)
  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
/work/git/linux-trace.git/include/linux/static_call.h:115:2: note: in expansion of macro âDECLARE_STATIC_CALLâ
  DECLARE_STATIC_CALL(key, _func);    \
  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
/work/git/linux-trace.git/include/linux/tracepoint.h:310:2: note: in expansion of macro âDEFINE_STATIC_CALLâ
  DEFINE_STATIC_CALL(__tp_func_##name, __tracepoint_iter_##name);
  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
/work/git/linux-trace.git/include/trace/define_trace.h:42:2: note: in expansion of macro âDEFINE_TRACE_FNâ
  DEFINE_TRACE_FN(name, reg, unreg, PARAMS(proto), PARAMS(args))
  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
/work/git/linux-trace.git/include/trace/events/syscalls.h:18:1: note: in expansion of macro âTRACE_EVENT_FNâ
 TRACE_EVENT_FN(sys_enter,
 ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
/work/git/linux-trace.git/include/linux/compiler.h:285:11: note: previous definition of â__addressable___tp_func_sys_enter40â was here
   __PASTE(__addressable_##sym, __LINE__) = (void *)&sym;
           ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
/work/git/linux-trace.git/include/linux/compiler_types.h:53:23: note: in definition of macro â___PASTEâ
 #define ___PASTE(a,b) a##b
                       ^
/work/git/linux-trace.git/include/linux/compiler.h:285:3: note: in expansion of macro â__PASTEâ
   __PASTE(__addressable_##sym, __LINE__) = (void *)&sym;
   ^~~~~~~
/work/git/linux-trace.git/include/linux/static_call.h:112:2: note: in expansion of macro â__ADDRESSABLEâ
  __ADDRESSABLE(key)
  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
/work/git/linux-trace.git/include/linux/tracepoint.h:234:2: note: in expansion of macro âDECLARE_STATIC_CALLâ
  DECLARE_STATIC_CALL(__tp_func_##name, __tracepoint_iter_##name); \
  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
/work/git/linux-trace.git/include/linux/tracepoint.h:421:2: note: in expansion of macro â__DECLARE_TRACEâ
  __DECLARE_TRACE(name, PARAMS(proto), PARAMS(args),  \
  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
/work/git/linux-trace.git/include/linux/tracepoint.h:560:2: note: in expansion of macro âDECLARE_TRACEâ
  DECLARE_TRACE(name, PARAMS(proto), PARAMS(args))
  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
/work/git/linux-trace.git/include/trace/events/syscalls.h:18:1: note: in expansion of macro âTRACE_EVENT_FNâ
 TRACE_EVENT_FN(sys_enter,

The complaint is on:

	DEFINE_STATIC_CALL(__tp_func_##name, __tracepoint_iter_##name);

And the previous definition is on:

	DECLARE_STATIC_CALL(__tp_func_##name, __tracepoint_iter_##name); \

-- Steve