Yong Zhang wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 6:01 PM, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
> <ana...@in.ibm.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 11:47:13PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>>> (2011/06/24 19:29), Steven Rostedt wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 2011-06-24 at 17:21 +0800, Yong Zhang wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> When I use kprobe to do something, I found some wired thing.
>>>>>
>>>>> When CONFIG_FUNCTION_TRACER is disabled:
>>>>> (gdb) disassemble do_fork
>>>>> Dump of assembler code for function do_fork:
>>>>> 0xc0037390 <+0>: mflr r0
>>>>> 0xc0037394 <+4>: stwu r1,-64(r1)
>>>>> 0xc0037398 <+8>: mfcr r12
>>>>> 0xc003739c <+12>: stmw r27,44(r1)
>>>>>
>>>>> Then I:
>>>>> modprobe kprobe_example func=do_fork offset=4
>>>>> ls
>>>>> Things works well.
>>>>>
>>>>> But when CONFIG_FUNCTION_TRACER is enabled:
>>>>> (gdb) disassemble do_fork
>>>>> Dump of assembler code for function do_fork:
>>>>> 0xc0040334 <+0>: mflr r0
>>>>> 0xc0040338 <+4>: stw r0,4(r1)
>>>>> 0xc004033c <+8>: bl 0xc00109d4 <mcount>
>>>>> 0xc0040340 <+12>: stwu r1,-80(r1)
>>>>> 0xc0040344 <+16>: mflr r0
>>>>> 0xc0040348 <+20>: stw r0,84(r1)
>>>>> 0xc004034c <+24>: mfcr r12
>>>>> Then I:
>>>>> modprobe kprobe_example func=do_fork offset=12
>>>>> ls
>>>>> 'ls' will never retrun. system freeze.
>>>> I'm not sure if x86 had a similar issue.
>>>>
>>>> Masami, have any ideas to why this happened?
>>> No, I don't familiar with ppc implementation. I guess
>>> that single-step resume code failed to emulate the
>>> instruction, but it strongly depends on ppc arch.
>>> Maybe IBM people may know what happened.
>>>
>>> Ananth, Jim, would you have any ideas?
>> On powerpc, we emulate sstep whenever possible. Only recently support to
>> emulate loads and stores got added. I don't have access to a powerpc box
>> today... but will try to recreate the problem ASAP and see what could be
>> happening in the presence of mcount.
>
> After taking more testing on it, it looks like the issue doesn't
> depend on mcount
> (AKA. CONFIG_FUNCTION_TRACER)
>
> As I said in the first email, with eldk-5.0 CONFIG_FUNCTION_TRACER=n
> will work well.
>
> But when I'm using eldk-4.2[1], both will fail. But the funny thing is when I
> set kprobe at several functions some works fine but some will fail. For
> example,
> at this time do_fork() works well, but show_interrupt() will crash.
>
> root@unknown:/root> insmod kprobe_example.ko func=show_interrupts
> Planted kprobe at c009be18
> root@unknown:/root> cat /proc/interrupts
> pre_handler: p->addr = 0xc009be18, nip = 0xc009be18, msr = 0x29000
> post_handler: p->addr = 0xc009be18, msr = 0x29000,boostable = 1
> Oops: Exception in kernel mode, sig: 11 [#1]
> PREEMPT MPC8536 DS
> Modules linked in: kprobe_example
> NIP: df159e74 LR: c0106f40 CTR: c009be18
> REGS: df159d90 TRAP: 0700 Not tainted (3.0.0-rc4-00001-ge8ffcca-dirty)
> MSR: 00029000 <EE,ME,CE> CR: 20202688 XER: 00000000
> TASK = dfaa5340[613] 'cat' THREAD: df158000
> GPR00: fffff000 df159e40 dfaa5340 df024a00 df159e78 00000000 df159f20 00000001
> GPR08: c10060d0 c009be18 00029000 df159e70 00000000 1001ca74 1ffb5f00 100a01cc
> GPR16: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 df024a28 df159f20 00000000 dfbff080
> GPR24: 10016000 00001000 df159f20 df159e78 dfbff080 df159e78 df024a00 df159e70
> NIP [df159e74] 0xdf159e74
> LR [c0106f40] seq_read+0x2a4/0x568
> Call Trace:
> [df159e40] [00029000] 0x29000 (unreliable)
> [df159e74] [00000000] (null)
> Instruction dump:
> XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX
> XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX
> ---[ end trace 60026bfc1fe79aed ]---
> Segmentation fault
Maybe I can understand this problem.
When we kprobe these operations such as store-and-update-word for SP(r1),
stwu r1, -A(r1)
The program exception is triggered then PPC always allocate an exception frame
as shown as the follows:
old r1 --------
...
nip
gpr[2]~gpr[31]
gpr[1] <--------- old r1 is stored here.
gpr[0]
-------- <-- pr_regs @offset 16 bytes
padding
STACK_FRAME_REGS_MARKER
LR
back chain
new r1 --------
Here emulate_step() is called to emulate 'stwu'. Actually this is equivalent to
1> update pr_regs->gpr[1] = mem(old r1 + (-A))
2> 'stw <old r1>, mem<(old r1 + (-A)) >
You should notice the stack based on new r1 would be covered with mem<old r1
+(-A)>. So after this, the kernel exit from post_krpobe, something would be
broken. This should depend on sizeof(-A).
For kprobe show_interrupts, you can see pregs->nip is re-written violently so
kernel issued.
But sometimes we may only re-write some violate registers the kernel still
alive. And so this is just why the kernel works well for some kprobed point
after you change some kernel options/toolchains.
If I'm correct its difficult to kprobe these stwu sp operation since the
sizeof(-A) is undermined for the kernel. So we have to implement in-depend
interrupt stack like PPC64.
Tiejun
>
> Thanks,
> Yong
>
> [1]: http://ftp.denx.de/pub/eldk/4.2/
>
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
