From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> Date: 2021-03-01 19:11:33
When testing uprobes we the test gets GEP (Global Entry Point)
address from kallsyms, but then the function is called locally
so the uprobe is not triggered.
Fixing this by adjusting the address to LEP (Local Entry Point)
for powerpc arch.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
---
.../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/attach_probe.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
@@ -36,7 +52,7 @@ void test_attach_probe(void)if(CHECK(base_addr<0,"get_base_addr","failed to find base addr: %zd",base_addr))return;-uprobe_offset=(size_t)&get_base_addr-base_addr;+uprobe_offset=get_offset((size_t)&get_base_addr-base_addr);skel=test_attach_probe__open_and_load();if(CHECK(!skel,"skel_open","failed to open skeleton\n"))
From: Yonghong Song <hidden> Date: 2021-03-02 10:29:15
On 3/1/21 11:04 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
quoted hunk
When testing uprobes we the test gets GEP (Global Entry Point)
address from kallsyms, but then the function is called locally
so the uprobe is not triggered.
Fixing this by adjusting the address to LEP (Local Entry Point)
for powerpc arch.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
---
.../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/attach_probe.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 11:11 AM Jiri Olsa [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted hunk
When testing uprobes we the test gets GEP (Global Entry Point)
address from kallsyms, but then the function is called locally
so the uprobe is not triggered.
Fixing this by adjusting the address to LEP (Local Entry Point)
for powerpc arch.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
---
.../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/attach_probe.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
if we mark this function __weak global, would it work as is? Would it
get an address of a global entry point? I know nothing about this GEP
vs LEP stuff, interesting :)
From: Jiri Olsa <hidden> Date: 2021-03-03 03:55:34
On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 02:58:53PM -0800, Yonghong Song wrote:
On 3/1/21 11:04 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
quoted
When testing uprobes we the test gets GEP (Global Entry Point)
address from kallsyms, but then the function is called locally
so the uprobe is not triggered.
Fixing this by adjusting the address to LEP (Local Entry Point)
for powerpc arch.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
---
.../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/attach_probe.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Any documentation in the kernel about this behavior? This will
help to validate the change without trying with powerpc64 qemu...
we got similar fix in perf:
7b6ff0bdbf4f perf probe ppc64le: Fixup function entry if using kallsyms lookup
CC-ing few other folks from ppc land for more info
jirka
From: Jiri Olsa <hidden> Date: 2021-03-03 03:55:36
On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 04:34:24PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 11:11 AM Jiri Olsa [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
When testing uprobes we the test gets GEP (Global Entry Point)
address from kallsyms, but then the function is called locally
so the uprobe is not triggered.
Fixing this by adjusting the address to LEP (Local Entry Point)
for powerpc arch.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
---
.../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/attach_probe.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
if we mark this function __weak global, would it work as is? Would it
get an address of a global entry point? I know nothing about this GEP
vs LEP stuff, interesting :)
you mean get_base_addr? it's already global
all the calls to get_base_addr within the object are made
to get_base_addr+0x8
00000000100350c0 <test_attach_probe>:
...
100350e0: 59 fd ff 4b bl 10034e38 <get_base_addr+0x8>
...
100358a8: 91 f5 ff 4b bl 10034e38 <get_base_addr+0x8>
I'm following perf fix we had for similar issue:
7b6ff0bdbf4f perf probe ppc64le: Fixup function entry if using kallsyms lookup
I'll get more info on that
jirka
From: Yonghong Song <hidden> Date: 2021-03-03 03:55:39
On 3/2/21 3:14 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 04:34:24PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
quoted
On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 11:11 AM Jiri Olsa [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
When testing uprobes we the test gets GEP (Global Entry Point)
address from kallsyms, but then the function is called locally
so the uprobe is not triggered.
Fixing this by adjusting the address to LEP (Local Entry Point)
for powerpc arch.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
---
.../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/attach_probe.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
if we mark this function __weak global, would it work as is? Would it
get an address of a global entry point? I know nothing about this GEP
vs LEP stuff, interesting :)
you mean get_base_addr? it's already global
all the calls to get_base_addr within the object are made
to get_base_addr+0x8
00000000100350c0 <test_attach_probe>:
...
100350e0: 59 fd ff 4b bl 10034e38 <get_base_addr+0x8>
...
100358a8: 91 f5 ff 4b bl 10034e38 <get_base_addr+0x8>
I'm following perf fix we had for similar issue:
7b6ff0bdbf4f perf probe ppc64le: Fixup function entry if using kallsyms lookup
I'll get more info on that
Thanks. The patch
7b6ff0bdbf4f perf probe ppc64le: Fixup function entry if using
kallsyms lookup
talked about offset + 8 for kernel symbols.
I guess uprobe symbol might be in the same situation if using the
same compilation mechanism as kernel. But it would be good
to get confirmation from ppc people.
On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 3:14 AM Jiri Olsa [off-list ref] wrote:
On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 04:34:24PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
quoted
On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 11:11 AM Jiri Olsa [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
When testing uprobes we the test gets GEP (Global Entry Point)
address from kallsyms, but then the function is called locally
so the uprobe is not triggered.
Fixing this by adjusting the address to LEP (Local Entry Point)
for powerpc arch.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
---
.../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/attach_probe.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
if we mark this function __weak global, would it work as is? Would it
get an address of a global entry point? I know nothing about this GEP
vs LEP stuff, interesting :)
you mean get_base_addr? it's already global
all the calls to get_base_addr within the object are made
to get_base_addr+0x8
00000000100350c0 <test_attach_probe>:
...
100350e0: 59 fd ff 4b bl 10034e38 <get_base_addr+0x8>
...
100358a8: 91 f5 ff 4b bl 10034e38 <get_base_addr+0x8>
I'm following perf fix we had for similar issue:
7b6ff0bdbf4f perf probe ppc64le: Fixup function entry if using kallsyms lookup
I'll get more info on that
My thinking was that if you mark the function as __weak, then the
compiler is not allowed to assume that the actual implementation of
that function will come from the same object (because it might be
replaced by the linker later), so it has to be pessimistic and use
global entry, no? Totally theoritizing here, of course.
From: Jiri Olsa <hidden> Date: 2021-03-03 03:56:17
On Tue, Mar 02, 2021 at 10:31:41AM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 3:14 AM Jiri Olsa [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 04:34:24PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
quoted
On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 11:11 AM Jiri Olsa [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
When testing uprobes we the test gets GEP (Global Entry Point)
address from kallsyms, but then the function is called locally
so the uprobe is not triggered.
Fixing this by adjusting the address to LEP (Local Entry Point)
for powerpc arch.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
---
.../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/attach_probe.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
if we mark this function __weak global, would it work as is? Would it
get an address of a global entry point? I know nothing about this GEP
vs LEP stuff, interesting :)
you mean get_base_addr? it's already global
all the calls to get_base_addr within the object are made
to get_base_addr+0x8
00000000100350c0 <test_attach_probe>:
...
100350e0: 59 fd ff 4b bl 10034e38 <get_base_addr+0x8>
...
100358a8: 91 f5 ff 4b bl 10034e38 <get_base_addr+0x8>
I'm following perf fix we had for similar issue:
7b6ff0bdbf4f perf probe ppc64le: Fixup function entry if using kallsyms lookup
I'll get more info on that
My thinking was that if you mark the function as __weak, then the
compiler is not allowed to assume that the actual implementation of
that function will come from the same object (because it might be
replaced by the linker later), so it has to be pessimistic and use
global entry, no? Totally theoritizing here, of course.
ah ok.. good idea, but it's still jumping to +8 in my test
# nm test_progs | grep get_base_addr
0000000010034e30 W get_base_addr
100350e0: 59 fd ff 4b bl 10034e38 <get_base_addr+0x8>
looks like it's linker, because compiler leaves just jump to next instruction
jirka
From: Naveen N. Rao <hidden> Date: 2021-03-03 22:57:33
On 2021/03/02 11:35AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 02:58:53PM -0800, Yonghong Song wrote:
quoted
On 3/1/21 11:04 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
quoted
When testing uprobes we the test gets GEP (Global Entry Point)
address from kallsyms, but then the function is called locally
so the uprobe is not triggered.
Fixing this by adjusting the address to LEP (Local Entry Point)
for powerpc arch.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
---
.../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/attach_probe.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
This needs to be specific to ELF v2 ABI, so you'll need to check
_CALL_ELF. See commit d5c2e2c17ae1d6 ("perf probe ppc64le: Prefer symbol
table lookup over DWARF") for an example.
quoted
quoted
+/*
+ * We get the GEP (Global Entry Point) address from kallsyms,
+ * but then the function is called locally, so we need to adjust
+ * the address to get LEP (Local Entry Point).
Any documentation in the kernel about this behavior? This will
help to validate the change without trying with powerpc64 qemu...
we got similar fix in perf:
7b6ff0bdbf4f perf probe ppc64le: Fixup function entry if using kallsyms lookup
CC-ing few other folks from ppc land for more info
@@ -36,7 +52,7 @@ void test_attach_probe(void) if (CHECK(base_addr < 0, "get_base_addr", "failed to find base addr: %zd", base_addr)) return;- uprobe_offset = (size_t)&get_base_addr - base_addr;+ uprobe_offset = get_offset((size_t)&get_base_addr - base_addr); skel = test_attach_probe__open_and_load(); if (CHECK(!skel, "skel_open", "failed to open skeleton\n"))
As documented in the links above, the right way to identify local entry
point (LEP) is by looking at the symbol table. Falling back to using a
hardcoded offset of 8 is a reasonable workaround if we don't have access
to the symbol table.
- Naveen
From: Naveen N. Rao <hidden> Date: 2021-03-03 22:57:34
On 2021/03/02 09:19AM, Yonghong Song wrote:
On 3/2/21 3:14 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
quoted
On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 04:34:24PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
quoted
On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 11:11 AM Jiri Olsa [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
When testing uprobes we the test gets GEP (Global Entry Point)
address from kallsyms, but then the function is called locally
so the uprobe is not triggered.
Fixing this by adjusting the address to LEP (Local Entry Point)
for powerpc arch.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
---
.../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/attach_probe.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
if we mark this function __weak global, would it work as is? Would it
get an address of a global entry point? I know nothing about this GEP
vs LEP stuff, interesting :)
you mean get_base_addr? it's already global
all the calls to get_base_addr within the object are made
to get_base_addr+0x8
00000000100350c0 <test_attach_probe>:
...
100350e0: 59 fd ff 4b bl 10034e38 <get_base_addr+0x8>
...
100358a8: 91 f5 ff 4b bl 10034e38 <get_base_addr+0x8>
I'm following perf fix we had for similar issue:
7b6ff0bdbf4f perf probe ppc64le: Fixup function entry if using kallsyms lookup
I'll get more info on that
Thanks. The patch
7b6ff0bdbf4f perf probe ppc64le: Fixup function entry if using kallsyms
lookup
talked about offset + 8 for kernel symbols.
I guess uprobe symbol might be in the same situation if using the
same compilation mechanism as kernel. But it would be good
to get confirmation from ppc people.
Yes, this is part of the ELF V2 ABI, so it applies to both kernel and
userspace.
- Naveen
From: Jiri Olsa <hidden> Date: 2021-03-03 23:08:07
On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 12:10:43PM +0530, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
On 2021/03/02 11:35AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
quoted
On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 02:58:53PM -0800, Yonghong Song wrote:
quoted
On 3/1/21 11:04 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
quoted
When testing uprobes we the test gets GEP (Global Entry Point)
address from kallsyms, but then the function is called locally
so the uprobe is not triggered.
Fixing this by adjusting the address to LEP (Local Entry Point)
for powerpc arch.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
---
.../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/attach_probe.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
This needs to be specific to ELF v2 ABI, so you'll need to check
_CALL_ELF. See commit d5c2e2c17ae1d6 ("perf probe ppc64le: Prefer symbol
table lookup over DWARF") for an example.
i see, there's the outer #if _CALL_ELF I missed
quoted
quoted
quoted
+/*
+ * We get the GEP (Global Entry Point) address from kallsyms,
+ * but then the function is called locally, so we need to adjust
+ * the address to get LEP (Local Entry Point).
Any documentation in the kernel about this behavior? This will
help to validate the change without trying with powerpc64 qemu...
we got similar fix in perf:
7b6ff0bdbf4f perf probe ppc64le: Fixup function entry if using kallsyms lookup
CC-ing few other folks from ppc land for more info
@@ -36,7 +52,7 @@ void test_attach_probe(void) if (CHECK(base_addr < 0, "get_base_addr", "failed to find base addr: %zd", base_addr)) return;- uprobe_offset = (size_t)&get_base_addr - base_addr;+ uprobe_offset = get_offset((size_t)&get_base_addr - base_addr); skel = test_attach_probe__open_and_load(); if (CHECK(!skel, "skel_open", "failed to open skeleton\n"))
As documented in the links above, the right way to identify local entry
point (LEP) is by looking at the symbol table. Falling back to using a
hardcoded offset of 8 is a reasonable workaround if we don't have access
to the symbol table.
thanks for the all the info, I'll send v2 with _CALL_ELF check
jirka
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> Date: 2021-03-04 01:00:04
"Naveen N. Rao" [off-list ref] writes:
On 2021/03/02 11:35AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
quoted
On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 02:58:53PM -0800, Yonghong Song wrote:
quoted
On 3/1/21 11:04 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
quoted
When testing uprobes we the test gets GEP (Global Entry Point)
address from kallsyms, but then the function is called locally
so the uprobe is not triggered.
Fixing this by adjusting the address to LEP (Local Entry Point)
for powerpc arch.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
---
.../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/attach_probe.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
This needs to be specific to ELF v2 ABI, so you'll need to check
_CALL_ELF. See commit d5c2e2c17ae1d6 ("perf probe ppc64le: Prefer symbol
table lookup over DWARF") for an example.
quoted
quoted
quoted
+/*
+ * We get the GEP (Global Entry Point) address from kallsyms,
+ * but then the function is called locally, so we need to adjust
+ * the address to get LEP (Local Entry Point).
Any documentation in the kernel about this behavior? This will
help to validate the change without trying with powerpc64 qemu...
There's a comment in ppc_function_entry(), but I don't think we have any
actual "documentation".
static inline unsigned long ppc_function_entry(void *func)
{
#ifdef PPC64_ELF_ABI_v2
u32 *insn = func;
/*
* A PPC64 ABIv2 function may have a local and a global entry
* point. We need to use the local entry point when patching
* functions, so identify and step over the global entry point
* sequence.
*
* The global entry point sequence is always of the form:
*
* addis r2,r12,XXXX
* addi r2,r2,XXXX
*
* A linker optimisation may convert the addis to lis:
*
* lis r2,XXXX
* addi r2,r2,XXXX
*/
if ((((*insn & OP_RT_RA_MASK) == ADDIS_R2_R12) ||
((*insn & OP_RT_RA_MASK) == LIS_R2)) &&
((*(insn+1) & OP_RT_RA_MASK) == ADDI_R2_R2))
return (unsigned long)(insn + 2);
else
return (unsigned long)func;
cheers
From: Jiri Olsa <hidden> Date: 2021-03-04 15:58:27
On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 11:46:27AM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
"Naveen N. Rao" [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
On 2021/03/02 11:35AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
quoted
On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 02:58:53PM -0800, Yonghong Song wrote:
quoted
On 3/1/21 11:04 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
quoted
When testing uprobes we the test gets GEP (Global Entry Point)
address from kallsyms, but then the function is called locally
so the uprobe is not triggered.
Fixing this by adjusting the address to LEP (Local Entry Point)
for powerpc arch.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
---
.../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/attach_probe.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
This needs to be specific to ELF v2 ABI, so you'll need to check
_CALL_ELF. See commit d5c2e2c17ae1d6 ("perf probe ppc64le: Prefer symbol
table lookup over DWARF") for an example.
quoted
quoted
quoted
+/*
+ * We get the GEP (Global Entry Point) address from kallsyms,
+ * but then the function is called locally, so we need to adjust
+ * the address to get LEP (Local Entry Point).
Any documentation in the kernel about this behavior? This will
help to validate the change without trying with powerpc64 qemu...
There's a comment in ppc_function_entry(), but I don't think we have any
actual "documentation".
static inline unsigned long ppc_function_entry(void *func)
{
#ifdef PPC64_ELF_ABI_v2
u32 *insn = func;
/*
* A PPC64 ABIv2 function may have a local and a global entry
* point. We need to use the local entry point when patching
* functions, so identify and step over the global entry point
* sequence.
hm, so I need to do the instructions check below as well
*
* The global entry point sequence is always of the form:
*
* addis r2,r12,XXXX
* addi r2,r2,XXXX
*
* A linker optimisation may convert the addis to lis:
*
* lis r2,XXXX
* addi r2,r2,XXXX
*/
if ((((*insn & OP_RT_RA_MASK) == ADDIS_R2_R12) ||
((*insn & OP_RT_RA_MASK) == LIS_R2)) &&
((*(insn+1) & OP_RT_RA_MASK) == ADDI_R2_R2))
is this check/instructions specific to kernel code?
In the test prog I see following instructions:
Dump of assembler code for function get_base_addr:
0x0000000010034cb0 <+0>: lis r2,4256
0x0000000010034cb4 <+4>: addi r2,r2,31488
...
but first instruction does not match the check in kernel code above:
1.insn value: 0x3c4010a0
2.insn value: 0x38427b00
the used defines are:
#define OP_RT_RA_MASK 0xffff0000UL
#define LIS_R2 0x3c020000UL
#define ADDIS_R2_R12 0x3c4c0000UL
#define ADDI_R2_R2 0x38420000UL
maybe we could skip the check, and run the test twice: first on
kallsym address and if the uprobe is not hit we will run it again
on address + 8
thanks,
jirka
From: Naveen N. Rao <hidden> Date: 2021-03-05 10:40:53
On 2021/03/04 04:55PM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 11:46:27AM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
quoted
"Naveen N. Rao" [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
On 2021/03/02 11:35AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
quoted
On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 02:58:53PM -0800, Yonghong Song wrote:
quoted
On 3/1/21 11:04 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
quoted
When testing uprobes we the test gets GEP (Global Entry Point)
address from kallsyms, but then the function is called locally
so the uprobe is not triggered.
Fixing this by adjusting the address to LEP (Local Entry Point)
for powerpc arch.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
---
.../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/attach_probe.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
This needs to be specific to ELF v2 ABI, so you'll need to check
_CALL_ELF. See commit d5c2e2c17ae1d6 ("perf probe ppc64le: Prefer symbol
table lookup over DWARF") for an example.
quoted
quoted
quoted
+/*
+ * We get the GEP (Global Entry Point) address from kallsyms,
+ * but then the function is called locally, so we need to adjust
+ * the address to get LEP (Local Entry Point).
Any documentation in the kernel about this behavior? This will
help to validate the change without trying with powerpc64 qemu...
There's a comment in ppc_function_entry(), but I don't think we have any
actual "documentation".
static inline unsigned long ppc_function_entry(void *func)
{
#ifdef PPC64_ELF_ABI_v2
u32 *insn = func;
/*
* A PPC64 ABIv2 function may have a local and a global entry
* point. We need to use the local entry point when patching
* functions, so identify and step over the global entry point
* sequence.
hm, so I need to do the instructions check below as well
It's a good check, but probably not necessary. In most functions, we
expect to be able to probe two instructions later without much of a
change to affect function tracing for userspace. For this reason, we
just probe at an offset of 8 as a reasonable fallback.
It is definetely good if we can come up with a better approach though.
quoted
*
* The global entry point sequence is always of the form:
*
* addis r2,r12,XXXX
* addi r2,r2,XXXX
*
* A linker optimisation may convert the addis to lis:
*
* lis r2,XXXX
* addi r2,r2,XXXX
*/
if ((((*insn & OP_RT_RA_MASK) == ADDIS_R2_R12) ||
((*insn & OP_RT_RA_MASK) == LIS_R2)) &&
((*(insn+1) & OP_RT_RA_MASK) == ADDI_R2_R2))
is this check/instructions specific to kernel code?
In the test prog I see following instructions:
Dump of assembler code for function get_base_addr:
0x0000000010034cb0 <+0>: lis r2,4256
0x0000000010034cb4 <+4>: addi r2,r2,31488
...
but first instruction does not match the check in kernel code above:
1.insn value: 0x3c4010a0
2.insn value: 0x38427b00
the used defines are:
#define OP_RT_RA_MASK 0xffff0000UL
#define LIS_R2 0x3c020000UL
#define ADDIS_R2_R12 0x3c4c0000UL
#define ADDI_R2_R2 0x38420000UL
Good catch! That's wrong, and I suspect we haven't noticed since kernel
almost always ends up using the addis variant. I will send a fix for
this.
maybe we could skip the check, and run the test twice: first on
kallsym address and if the uprobe is not hit we will run it again
on address + 8
Sure, like I mentioned, I'm fine with any approach. Offset'ing into the
function by 8 is easy and generally works. Re-trying is fine too. The
proper approach will requires us to consult the symbol table and check
st_other field [see commit 0b3c2264ae30ed ("perf symbols: Fix kallsyms
perf test on ppc64le")]
Thanks,
- Naveen
From: Jiri Olsa <hidden> Date: 2021-03-05 13:39:59
On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 07:04:59AM +0530, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
SNIP
quoted
quoted
static inline unsigned long ppc_function_entry(void *func)
{
#ifdef PPC64_ELF_ABI_v2
u32 *insn = func;
/*
* A PPC64 ABIv2 function may have a local and a global entry
* point. We need to use the local entry point when patching
* functions, so identify and step over the global entry point
* sequence.
hm, so I need to do the instructions check below as well
It's a good check, but probably not necessary. In most functions, we
expect to be able to probe two instructions later without much of a
change to affect function tracing for userspace. For this reason, we
just probe at an offset of 8 as a reasonable fallback.
It is definetely good if we can come up with a better approach though.
quoted
quoted
*
* The global entry point sequence is always of the form:
*
* addis r2,r12,XXXX
* addi r2,r2,XXXX
*
* A linker optimisation may convert the addis to lis:
*
* lis r2,XXXX
* addi r2,r2,XXXX
*/
if ((((*insn & OP_RT_RA_MASK) == ADDIS_R2_R12) ||
((*insn & OP_RT_RA_MASK) == LIS_R2)) &&
((*(insn+1) & OP_RT_RA_MASK) == ADDI_R2_R2))
is this check/instructions specific to kernel code?
In the test prog I see following instructions:
Dump of assembler code for function get_base_addr:
0x0000000010034cb0 <+0>: lis r2,4256
0x0000000010034cb4 <+4>: addi r2,r2,31488
...
but first instruction does not match the check in kernel code above:
1.insn value: 0x3c4010a0
2.insn value: 0x38427b00
the used defines are:
#define OP_RT_RA_MASK 0xffff0000UL
#define LIS_R2 0x3c020000UL
#define ADDIS_R2_R12 0x3c4c0000UL
#define ADDI_R2_R2 0x38420000UL
Good catch! That's wrong, and I suspect we haven't noticed since kernel
almost always ends up using the addis variant. I will send a fix for
this.
the new macro value from your fix works for the test,
so I'll use it in v2, so we don't just blindly go to
+8 offset.. I'll send it out shortly
quoted
maybe we could skip the check, and run the test twice: first on
kallsym address and if the uprobe is not hit we will run it again
on address + 8
Sure, like I mentioned, I'm fine with any approach. Offset'ing into the
function by 8 is easy and generally works. Re-trying is fine too. The
proper approach will requires us to consult the symbol table and check
st_other field [see commit 0b3c2264ae30ed ("perf symbols: Fix kallsyms
perf test on ppc64le")]
I think we don't want to complicate this test with symbol table
check. I'll propose the fix with the extra instructions check
for now and we can add symbol table check in future if it's not
enough
thanks for all the info,
jirka