Thread (13 messages) 13 messages, 4 authors, 2025-09-24

Re: [BUG] Failed to obtain stack trace via bpf_get_stackid on ARM64 architecture

From: Feng Yang <hidden>
Date: 2025-09-22 02:16:29
Also in: bpf, lkml

On Sun, 21 Sep 2025 22:30:37 +0900 Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
On Fri, 19 Sep 2025 19:56:20 -0700
Alexei Starovoitov [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 12:19 AM Feng Yang [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
When I use bpf_program__attach_kprobe_multi_opts to hook a BPF program that contains the bpf_get_stackid function on the arm64 architecture,
I find that the stack trace cannot be obtained. The trace->nr in __bpf_get_stackid is 0, and the function returns -EFAULT.

For example:
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/kprobe_multi.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/kprobe_multi.c
index 9e1ca8e34913..844fa88cdc4c 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/kprobe_multi.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/kprobe_multi.c
@@ -36,6 +36,15 @@ __u64 kretprobe_test6_result = 0;
 __u64 kretprobe_test7_result = 0;
 __u64 kretprobe_test8_result = 0;

+typedef __u64 stack_trace_t[2];
+
+struct {
+       __uint(type, BPF_MAP_TYPE_STACK_TRACE);
+       __uint(max_entries, 1024);
+       __type(key, __u32);
+       __type(value, stack_trace_t);
+} stacks SEC(".maps");
+
 static void kprobe_multi_check(void *ctx, bool is_return)
 {
        if (bpf_get_current_pid_tgid() >> 32 != pid)
@@ -100,7 +109,9 @@ int test_kretprobe(struct pt_regs *ctx)
 SEC("kprobe.multi")
 int test_kprobe_manual(struct pt_regs *ctx)
 {
+       int id = bpf_get_stackid(ctx, &stacks, 0);
ftrace_partial_regs() supposed to work on x86 and arm64,
but since multi-kprobe is the only user...
It should be able to unwind stack. It saves sp, pc, lr, fp.

	regs->sp = afregs->sp;
	regs->pc = afregs->pc;
	regs->regs[29] = afregs->fp;
	regs->regs[30] = afregs->lr;
quoted
I suspect the arm64 implementation wasn't really tested.
Or maybe there is some other issue.
It depends on how bpf_get_stackid() works. Some registers for that
function may not be saved.

If it returns -EFAULT, the get_perf_callchain() returns NULL.
During my test, the reason for returning -EFAULT was that trace->nr was 0.

static long __bpf_get_stackid(struct bpf_map *map,
			      struct perf_callchain_entry *trace, u64 flags)
{
	struct bpf_stack_map *smap = container_of(map, struct bpf_stack_map, map);
	struct stack_map_bucket *bucket, *new_bucket, *old_bucket;
	u32 skip = flags & BPF_F_SKIP_FIELD_MASK;
	u32 hash, id, trace_nr, trace_len;
	bool user = flags & BPF_F_USER_STACK;
	u64 *ips;
	bool hash_matches;

	if (trace->nr <= skip)
		/* skipping more than usable stack trace */
		return -EFAULT;
	......
}

thanks
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help