From: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 5/5] ftrace/x86-32: Add -mfentry support to x86_32 with DYNAMIC_FTRACE set
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 18:24:12 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170316182412.965a091f2721062b21556da7@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170315200255.828608428@goodmis.org>
On Wed, 15 Mar 2017 15:55:32 -0400
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
> From: "Steven Rostedt (VMware)" <rostedt@goodmis.org>
>
> x86_64 has had fentry support for some time. I did not add support to x86_32
> as I was unsure if it will be used much in the future. It is still very much
> used, and there's issues with function graph tracing with gcc playing around
> with the mcount frames, causing function graph to panic. The fentry code
> does not have this issue, and is able to cope as there is no frame to mess
> up.
>
> Note, this only add support for fentry when DYNAMIC_FTRACE is set. There's
> really no reason to not have that set, because the performance of the
> machine drops significantly when it's not enabled. I only keep
> !DYNAMIC_FTRACE around to test it off, as there's still some archs that have
> FTRACE but not DYNAMIC_FTRACE.
>
> Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt@goodmis.org>
> ---
> arch/x86/Kconfig | 2 +-
> arch/x86/kernel/ftrace_32.S | 88 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> 2 files changed, 79 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig
> index cc98d5a294ee..8c17146427ca 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
> @@ -127,7 +127,7 @@ config X86
> select HAVE_EBPF_JIT if X86_64
> select HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS
> select HAVE_EXIT_THREAD
> - select HAVE_FENTRY if X86_64
> + select HAVE_FENTRY if X86_64 || DYNAMIC_FTRACE
> select HAVE_FTRACE_MCOUNT_RECORD
> select HAVE_FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER
> select HAVE_FUNCTION_TRACER
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/ftrace_32.S b/arch/x86/kernel/ftrace_32.S
> index 8ca33d9806ac..4bf8223555cd 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/ftrace_32.S
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/ftrace_32.S
> @@ -9,27 +9,75 @@
> #include <asm/export.h>
> #include <asm/ftrace.h>
>
> +
> +#ifdef CC_USING_FENTRY
> +# define function_hook __fentry__
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(__fentry__)
> +#else
> +# define function_hook mcount
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(mcount)
> +#endif
> +
> +/* mcount uses a frame pointer even if CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER is not set */
> +#if !defined(CC_USING_FENTRY) || defined(CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER)
> +# define USING_FRAME_POINTER
> +#endif
> +
> +#ifdef USING_FRAME_POINTER
> +# ifdef CC_USING_FENTRY
> +# define MCOUNT_FRAME_SIZE (4*4) /* bp,ip and parent's */
> +# else
> +# define MCOUNT_FRAME_SIZE 4 /* just the bp */
> +# endif
> +# define MCOUNT_FRAME 1 /* using frame = true */
> +#else
> +# define MCOUNT_FRAME_SIZE 0 /* no stack frame */
> +# define MCOUNT_FRAME 0 /* using frame = false */
> +#endif
It seems that there is no use of MCOUNT_FRAME_SIZE below. Do we really need it?
Thanks,
--
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-16 9:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-15 19:55 [RFC][PATCH 0/5] ftrace/x86_32: Ftrace cleanup and add support for -mfentry Steven Rostedt
2017-03-15 19:55 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/5] x86/ftrace: Rename mcount_64.S to ftrace.S Steven Rostedt
2017-03-15 19:55 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/5] ftrace/x86-32: Move the ftrace specific code out of entry_32.S Steven Rostedt
2017-03-15 19:55 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/5] ftrace/x86_32: Add stack frame pointer to ftrace_caller Steven Rostedt
2017-03-15 21:13 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-03-15 19:55 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/5] ftrace/x86_32: Clean up ftrace_regs_caller Steven Rostedt
2017-03-15 21:13 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-03-15 23:11 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-03-16 8:39 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2017-03-15 19:55 ` [RFC][PATCH 5/5] ftrace/x86-32: Add -mfentry support to x86_32 with DYNAMIC_FTRACE set Steven Rostedt
2017-03-15 21:55 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-03-15 23:13 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-03-16 9:24 ` Masami Hiramatsu [this message]
2017-03-16 13:02 ` Steven Rostedt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170316182412.965a091f2721062b21556da7@kernel.org \
--to=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®