Re: [PATCH 1/2] riscv/ftrace: add DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_DIRECT_CALLS support

From: Song Shuai
Date: Thu Nov 24 2022 - 06:49:10 EST

Next message: Kemeng Shi: "Re: [PATCH 02/11] blk-throttle: Fix that bps of child could exceed bps limited in parent"
Previous message: Krzysztof Kozlowski: "Re: [PATCH v2 1/9] dt-bindings: clock: Add SM8550 GCC clocks"
Next in thread: Guo Ren: "Re: [PATCH 1/2] riscv/ftrace: add DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_DIRECT_CALLS support"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Guo Ren <guoren@xxxxxxxxxx> 于2022年11月24日周四 03:40写道：
>
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 11:09 AM Song Shuai <suagrfillet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Song Shuai <suagrfillet@xxxxxxxxx> 于2022年11月24日周四 02:52写道：
> > >
> > > Guo Ren <guoren@xxxxxxxxxx> 于2022年11月24日周四 02:08写道：
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 1:27 AM Song Shuai <suagrfillet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Guo Ren <guoren@xxxxxxxxxx> 于2022年11月23日周三 23:02写道：
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cool job, thx.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 10:20 PM Song Shuai <suagrfillet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> This patch adds DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_DIRECT_CALLS support for RISC-V.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> select the DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_DIRECT_CALLS to provide the
> > > > > >> register_ftrace_direct[_multi] interfaces allowing users to register
> > > > > >> the customed trampoline (direct_caller) as the mcount for one or
> > > > > >> more target functions. And modify_ftrace_direct[_multi] are also
> > > > > >> provided for modifying direct_caller.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> To make the direct_caller and the other ftrace hooks (eg. function/fgraph
> > > > > >> tracer, k[ret]probes) co-exist, a temporary register is nominated to
> > > > > >> store the address of direct_caller in ftrace_regs_caller. After the
> > > > > >> setting of the address direct_caller by direct_ops->func and the
> > > > > >> RESTORE_REGS in ftrace_regs_caller, direct_caller will be jumped to
> > > > > >> by the `jr` inst.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Signed-off-by: Song Shuai <suagrfillet@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > >> ---
> > > > > >> arch/riscv/Kconfig | 1 +
> > > > > >> arch/riscv/include/asm/ftrace.h | 6 ++++++
> > > > > >> arch/riscv/kernel/mcount-dyn.S | 4 ++++
> > > > > >> 3 files changed, 11 insertions(+)
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> diff --git a/arch/riscv/Kconfig b/arch/riscv/Kconfig
> > > > > >> index 39ec8d628cf6..d083ec08d0b6 100644
> > > > > >> --- a/arch/riscv/Kconfig
> > > > > >> +++ b/arch/riscv/Kconfig
> > > > > >> @@ -278,6 +278,7 @@ config ARCH_RV64I
> > > > > >> select ARCH_SUPPORTS_INT128 if CC_HAS_INT128
> > > > > >> select HAVE_DYNAMIC_FTRACE if !XIP_KERNEL && MMU && $(cc-option,-fpatchable-function-entry=8)
> > > > > >> select HAVE_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_REGS if HAVE_DYNAMIC_FTRACE
> > > > > >> + select HAVE_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_DIRECT_CALLS
> > > > > >> select HAVE_FTRACE_MCOUNT_RECORD if !XIP_KERNEL
> > > > > >> select HAVE_FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER
> > > > > >> select HAVE_FUNCTION_TRACER if !XIP_KERNEL && !PREEMPTION
> > > > > >> diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/ftrace.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/ftrace.h
> > > > > >> index 01bebb28eabe..be4d57566139 100644
> > > > > >> --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/ftrace.h
> > > > > >> +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/ftrace.h
> > > > > >> @@ -114,6 +114,12 @@ struct ftrace_regs;
> > > > > >> void ftrace_graph_func(unsigned long ip, unsigned long parent_ip,
> > > > > >> struct ftrace_ops *op, struct ftrace_regs *fregs);
> > > > > >> #define ftrace_graph_func ftrace_graph_func
> > > > > >> +
> > > > > >> +static inline void arch_ftrace_set_direct_caller(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long addr)
> > > > > >> +{
> > > > > >> + regs->t1 = addr;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > How about regs->t0 = addr; ?
> > > > > > And delete all mcount-dyn.S modification.
> > > > > >
> > > > > The direct_caller has the same program layout as the ftrace_caller, which means
> > > > > the reg t0 will never be changed when direct_caller returns.
> > > > >
> > > > > If regs->t0 changes here and ftrace_regs_caller executes `jr t0`,
> > > > > direct_caller will enter the dead loop.
> > > > ?
> > > >
> > > > ftrace_regs_caller->call_direct_funcs->
> > > > arch_ftrace_set_direct_caller-> ftrace_regs_caller jr t0.
> > > >
> > > > Only call_direct_funcs call arch_ftrace_set_direct_caller !
> > > >
> > > > static void call_direct_funcs(unsigned long ip, unsigned long pip,
> > > > struct ftrace_ops *ops, struct ftrace_regs *fregs)
> > > > {
> > > > struct pt_regs *regs = ftrace_get_regs(fregs);
> > > > unsigned long addr;
> > > >
> > > > addr = ftrace_find_rec_direct(ip);
> > > > if (!addr)
> > > > return;
> > > >
> > > > arch_ftrace_set_direct_caller(regs, addr);
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > When direct_caller and function tracer co-hook a function, the simple
> > > diagram is like this:
> > >
> > > ```
> > > func -> ftrace_regs_caller -> arch_ftrace_ops_list_func ->
> > > function_trace_call // write ringbuffer
> > > |
> > > -> call_direct_funcs // regs->t1 = direct_caller
> > > -> t1 !=0 && jr t1 // goto direct_caller
> > > ```
> > >
> > ```
> > f -- regs_caller -- list_func
> > | | -- function_trace_call
> > | | -- call_direct_funcs // t1 = addr
> > |-- t1 !=0 && jr t1 // goto direct_caller
> Cool diagram! Thx, but we still need a discussion:
> f -- regs_caller
> | -- SAVE_ABI_REGS 1
> | -- list_func
> | | -- function_trace_call
> | | -- call_direct_funcs // t1 = addr
> | -- RESTORE_ABI_REGS 1
> |-- t1 !=0 && jr t1 // goto direct_caller
> If you set t1 non-zero, then we always go to direct_caller. I think
> the code is equal to set t0=addr.
If only focusing on the whole ftrace_regs_caller code, you're right.

But we should also take direct_caller code into the consideration,
if using t0 here, direct_caller will always return to itself as I
described before.
> | | -- call_direct_funcs // t0 = addr
> | -- RESTORE_ABI_REGS 1
> |-- jr t0 // goto direct_caller
>
> I think the only problem happens in the below non-existent situation:
> f -- regs_caller
> | -- SAVE_ABI_REGS 1
> | -- list_func
> | | -- call_direct_funcs // t0 = addr
> | | -- function_trace_call //t0 contains
> direct_caller instead
function_trace_call is one type of global_ops->func which doesn't take care
of the regs->t0.

But the func of IPMODIFY ops (eg. livepatch, kprobe with posthandler)
will change regs->epc which will then be restored to t0 in ftrace_regs_caller.
And then the address of direct_caller will be covered in this situation.
I'm not very clear about the process of the livepatch and kprobe in RISCV
but I think we should keep t0 for their ipmodifying.
> | -- RESTORE_ABI_REGS 1
> |-- jr t0 // goto direct_caller
>
> The key issue is whether going to direct_caller correctly depends on
> call_direct_funcs called, right?
Yes, in other words, call_direct_func informs ftrace_regs_caller that
there is a direct caller stored in t1, please jump to it first.
>
> > ```
> > This diagram looks better.
> > > And the direct_caller has a similar implement as ftrace_caller.
> > >
> > > ```
> > > direct_caller:
> > > add sp,sp,-?
> > > sd t0,?(sp)
> > > sd ra,?(sp)
> > > call foo
> > > ld t0,?(sp)
> > > ld ra,?(sp)
> > > add sp,sp,?
> > > jr t0 // <- back to function entry
> > > ```
> > >
> > > If we change regs->t0 as direct_caller and execute `jr t0` directly,
> > > the direct_caller will always jump to itself due to its last `jr` inst.
--- Here is what I described in the previous email.
> > >
> > > ```
> > > func -> ftrace_regs_caller -> arch_ftrace_ops_list_func ->
> > > function_trace_call // write ringbuffer
> > > |
> > > -> call_direct_funcs // regs->t0 = direct_caller
> > > -> jr t0 // goto direct_caller
> > >
> > > direct_caller:
> > > ...
> > > sd t0,?(sp)
> > > ...
> > > ld t0,?(s0)
> > > ...
> > > jr t0 // goto direct_caller always
> > > ```
> > >
> > > Hope I made it clear.
> > > > >
> > > > > Actually the reg t0 always saves the address of function entry with 8B
> > > > > offset, it should only
> > > > > changed by the IPMODIFY ops instead of the direct_ops.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> +}
> > > > > >> +
> > > > > >> #endif /* CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_REGS */
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> #endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
> > > > > >> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/mcount-dyn.S b/arch/riscv/kernel/mcount-dyn.S
> > > > > >> index 466c6ef217b1..b89c85a58569 100644
> > > > > >> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/mcount-dyn.S
> > > > > >> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/mcount-dyn.S
> > > > > >> @@ -233,6 +233,7 @@ ENDPROC(ftrace_caller)
> > > > > >> #else /* CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_REGS */
> > > > > >> ENTRY(ftrace_regs_caller)
> > > > > >> SAVE_ABI_REGS 1
> > > > > >> + REG_S x0, PT_T1(sp)
> > > > > >> PREPARE_ARGS
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> ftrace_regs_call:
> > > > > >> @@ -241,7 +242,10 @@ ftrace_regs_call:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> RESTORE_ABI_REGS 1
> > > > > >> + bnez t1,.Ldirect
> > > > > >> jr t0
> > > > > >> +.Ldirect:
> > > > > >> + jr t1
> > > > > >> ENDPROC(ftrace_regs_caller)
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> ENTRY(ftrace_caller)
> > > > > >> --
> > > > > >> 2.20.1
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Best Regards
> > > > > > Guo Ren
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Best Regards
> > > > Guo Ren
> > > Thanks,
> > > Song
> > Thanks,
> > Song
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards
> Guo Ren
Thanks,
Song

Next message: Kemeng Shi: "Re: [PATCH 02/11] blk-throttle: Fix that bps of child could exceed bps limited in parent"
Previous message: Krzysztof Kozlowski: "Re: [PATCH v2 1/9] dt-bindings: clock: Add SM8550 GCC clocks"
Next in thread: Guo Ren: "Re: [PATCH 1/2] riscv/ftrace: add DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_DIRECT_CALLS support"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]