Re: [PATCH v14 04/19] function_graph: Replace fgraph_ret_regs with ftrace_regs

From: Google
Date: Tue Oct 01 2024 - 19:13:01 EST


On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 14:55:48 -0400
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Tue, 17 Sep 2024 10:55:39 +0100
> Will Deacon <will@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > The arm64 part looks good to me, although passing a partially-populated
> > struct out of asm feels like it's going to cause us hard-to-debug
> > problems down the line if any of those extra fields get used. How hard
> > would it be to poison the unpopulated members of 'ftrace_regs'?
>
> The purpose of creating ftrace_regs was to allow a partially populated
> pt_regs to be sent around, as Thomas Gleixner and Peter Zijlstra were
> against using pt_regs that were not fully populated. Hence, I created
> "ftrace_regs" for this purpose.
>
> ftrace_regs should never be accessed via its internal elements but only with
> its accessor functions, as depending on the arch or functionality used, the
> content of the structure should never be trusted. The accessor functions
> will do all the verification needed.
>
> I may add some compiler hacks to enforce this. Something like:
>
> struct ftrace_regs {
> void *nothing_to_see_here;
> };

Yeah, OK. But sizeof(fregs) may be changed. (Shouldn't we do too?)

>
> And then change the arch code to be something like:
>
> // in arch/arm64/include/asm/ftrace.h:
>
> struct arch_ftrace_regs {
> /* x0 - x8 */
> unsigned long regs[9];
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_DIRECT_CALLS
> unsigned long direct_tramp;
> #else
> unsigned long __unused;
> #endif
>
> unsigned long fp;
> unsigned long lr;
>
> unsigned long sp;
> unsigned long pc;
> };

And if it is pt_regs compatible,

#define arch_ftrace_regs pt_regs

?

>
> #define get_arch_ftrace_regs(fregs) ((struct arch_ftrace_regs *)(fregs))
>
> static __always_inline void
> ftrace_regs_set_instruction_pointer(struct ftrace_regs *fregs,
> unsigned long pc)
> {
> struct arch_ftrace_regs *afregs = get_ftrace_regs(fregs);
> afregs->pc = pc;
> }
>
>
> -- Steve


Thanks,

--
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx>