mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>
To: Chen Zhongjin <chenzhongjin@huawei.com>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
	mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com,
	hpa@zytor.com, akpm@linux-foudation.org, ben-linux@fluff.org,
	wuchi.zero@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86: profiling: remove lock functions hack for !FRAME_POINTER
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2023 08:43:35 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230419154335.4vc7rouxl4gsynzm@treble> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230410022226.181812-2-chenzhongjin@huawei.com>

On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 10:22:25AM +0800, Chen Zhongjin wrote:
> Syzbot has been reporting the problem of stack-out-of-bounds in
> profile_pc for a long time:
> https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=84fe685c02cd112a2ac3
> 
> profile_pc tries to get pc if current regs is inside lock function. For
> !CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER it used a hack way to get the pc from stack, which
> is not work with ORC. It makes profile_pc read illeagal address, return
> wrong result, and frequently triggers KASAN.
> 
> Since lock profiling can be handled with much better other tools, It's
> reasonable to remove lock functions hack for !FRAME_POINTER kernel.
> 
> Suggested-by: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Chen Zhongjin <chenzhongjin@huawei.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/kernel/time.c | 14 +-------------
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 13 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/time.c b/arch/x86/kernel/time.c
> index e42faa792c07..e08fac7bb71e 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/time.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/time.c
> @@ -29,22 +29,10 @@ unsigned long profile_pc(struct pt_regs *regs)
>  {
>  	unsigned long pc = instruction_pointer(regs);
>  
> -	if (!user_mode(regs) && in_lock_functions(pc)) {
>  #ifdef CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER
> +	if (!user_mode(regs) && in_lock_functions(pc))

If lock profiling is no longer useful then we should just remove it
altogether, not just for ORC.

-- 
Josh

  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-04-19 15:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-04-10  2:22 [PATCH 0/2] Fix two bugs for profile Chen Zhongjin
2023-04-10  2:22 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86: profiling: remove lock functions hack for !FRAME_POINTER Chen Zhongjin
2023-04-10 19:34   ` Dave Hansen
2023-04-12  7:01     ` Chen Zhongjin
2023-04-12 10:01       ` David Laight
2023-04-13  7:53         ` Chen Zhongjin
2023-04-19 16:17         ` Josh Poimboeuf
2023-04-19 15:43   ` Josh Poimboeuf [this message]
2023-04-10  2:22 ` [PATCH 2/2] profiling: Check prof_buffer in profile_tick() Chen Zhongjin

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=20230419154335.4vc7rouxl4gsynzm@treble \
    --to=jpoimboe@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foudation.org \
    --cc=ben-linux@fluff.org \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=chenzhongjin@huawei.com \
    --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=wuchi.zero@gmail.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.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®