Re: [PATCH v3] ftrace/x86: Remove jumps to ftrace_epilogue and simplify trampolines

From: Peter Zijlstra
Date: Tue Jul 19 2022 - 16:30:30 EST


On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 03:24:05PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> @@ -356,12 +353,6 @@ create_trampoline(struct ftrace_ops *ops, unsigned int *tramp_size)
> if (WARN_ON(ret < 0))
> goto fail;
>
> - ip = trampoline + size;
> - if (cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_RETHUNK))
> - __text_gen_insn(ip, JMP32_INSN_OPCODE, ip, &__x86_return_thunk, JMP32_INSN_SIZE);
> - else
> - memcpy(ip, retq, sizeof(retq));
> -
> /* No need to test direct calls on created trampolines */
> if (ops->flags & FTRACE_OPS_FL_SAVE_REGS) {
> /* NOP the jnz 1f; but make sure it's a 2 byte jnz */

> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/ftrace_64.S b/arch/x86/kernel/ftrace_64.S
> index dfeb227de561..6294c14c51c9 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/ftrace_64.S
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/ftrace_64.S
> @@ -164,7 +164,7 @@ SYM_INNER_LABEL(ftrace_call, SYM_L_GLOBAL)
> movq %rax, MCOUNT_REG_SIZE(%rsp)
>
> restore_mcount_regs
> -
> + RET
> /*
> * The code up to this label is copied into trampolines so
> * think twice before adding any new code or changing the

I like the idea, but I think this is broken. When those RETs become 'JMP
__x86_return_thunk' you can't simply copy the instruction. You also have
to fix up the relative addressing.