Re: [PATCH v4 5/6] powerpc: Add show_user_instructions()
From: Murilo Opsfelder Araujo <hidden>
Date: 2018-08-03 00:42:14
Also in:
lkml
Hi, Christophe. On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 07:26:20AM +0200, Christophe LEROY wrote:
Le 01/08/2018 à 23:33, Murilo Opsfelder Araujo a écrit :quoted
show_user_instructions() is a slightly modified version of show_instructions() that allows userspace instruction dump. This will be useful within show_signal_msg() to dump userspace instructions of the faulty location. Here is a sample of what show_user_instructions() outputs: pandafault[10850]: code: 4bfffeec 4bfffee8 3c401002 38427f00 fbe1fff8 f821ffc1 7c3f0b78 3d22fffe pandafault[10850]: code: 392988d0 f93f0020 e93f0020 39400048 <99490000> 39200000 7d234b78 383f0040 The current->comm and current->pid printed can serve as a glue that links the instructions dump to its originator, allowing messages to be interleaved in the logs. Signed-off-by: Murilo Opsfelder Araujo <redacted> --- arch/powerpc/include/asm/stacktrace.h | 13 +++++++++ arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 53 insertions(+) create mode 100644 arch/powerpc/include/asm/stacktrace.hdiff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/stacktrace.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/stacktrace.h new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..6149b53b3bc8 --- /dev/null +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/stacktrace.h@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@ +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ +/* + * Stack trace functions. + * + * Copyright 2018, Murilo Opsfelder Araujo, IBM Corporation. + */ + +#ifndef _ASM_POWERPC_STACKTRACE_H +#define _ASM_POWERPC_STACKTRACE_H + +void show_user_instructions(struct pt_regs *regs); + +#endif /* _ASM_POWERPC_STACKTRACE_H */diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c index e9533b4d2f08..364645ac732c 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c@@ -1299,6 +1299,46 @@ static void show_instructions(struct pt_regs *regs) pr_cont("\n"); } +void show_user_instructions(struct pt_regs *regs) +{ + int i; + const char *prefix = KERN_INFO "%s[%d]: code: "; + unsigned long pc = regs->nip - (instructions_to_print * 3 / 4 * + sizeof(int)); + + printk(prefix, current->comm, current->pid);Why not use pr_info() and remove KERN_INFO from *prefix ?
Because it doesn't compile:
arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c:1317:10: error: expected ‘)’ before ‘prefix’
pr_info(prefix, current->comm, current->pid);
^
./include/linux/printk.h:288:21: note: in definition of macro ‘pr_fmt’
#define pr_fmt(fmt) fmt
^
`pr_info(prefix, ...)` expands to `printk("\001" "6" prefix, ...)`,
which is an invalid string concatenation.
`pr_info("%s", ...)` expands to `printk("\001" "6" "%s", ...)`, which is
valid.
quoted
+ + for (i = 0; i < instructions_to_print; i++) { + int instr; + + if (!(i % 8) && (i > 0)) { + pr_cont("\n"); + printk(prefix, current->comm, current->pid); + } + +#if !defined(CONFIG_BOOKE) + /* If executing with the IMMU off, adjust pc rather + * than print XXXXXXXX. + */ + if (!(regs->msr & MSR_IR)) + pc = (unsigned long)phys_to_virt(pc);Shouldn't this be done outside of the loop, only once ?
I don't think so. pc gets incremented at the bottom of the loop: pc += sizeof(int); Adjusting pc is necessary at each iteration. Leaving this block inside the loop seems correct. Cheers Murilo