linux.git/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c, branch v4.19

arm64: Add stack information to on_accessible_stack

2018-07-26T10:36:07+00:00

In preparation for enabling the stackleak plugin on arm64,
we need a way to get the bounds of the current stack. Extend
on_accessible_stack to get this information.

Acked-by: Alexander Popov 
Reviewed-by: Mark Rutland 
Signed-off-by: Laura Abbott 
[will: folded in fix for allmodconfig build breakage w/ sdei]
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon

Revert "arm64: fix infinite stacktrace"

2018-07-12T10:37:40+00:00

This reverts commit 7e7df71fd57ff2894d96abb0080922bf39460a79.

When unwinding out of the IRQ stack and onto the interrupted EL1 stack,
we cannot rely on the frame pointer being strictly increasing, as this
could terminate the backtrace early depending on how the stacks have
been allocated.

Signed-off-by: Will Deacon

arm64: fix infinite stacktrace

2018-07-04T17:34:23+00:00

I've got this infinite stacktrace when debugging another problem:
[  908.795225] INFO: rcu_preempt detected stalls on CPUs/tasks:
[  908.796176]  1-...!: (1 GPs behind) idle=952/1/4611686018427387904 softirq=1462/1462 fqs=355
[  908.797692]  2-...!: (1 GPs behind) idle=f42/1/4611686018427387904 softirq=1550/1551 fqs=355
[  908.799189]  (detected by 0, t=2109 jiffies, g=130, c=129, q=235)
[  908.800284] Task dump for CPU 1:
[  908.800871] kworker/1:1     R  running task        0    32      2 0x00000022
[  908.802127] Workqueue: writecache-writeabck writecache_writeback [dm_writecache]
[  908.820285] Call trace:
[  908.824785]  __switch_to+0x68/0x90
[  908.837661]  0xfffffe00603afd90
[  908.844119]  0xfffffe00603afd90
[  908.850091]  0xfffffe00603afd90
[  908.854285]  0xfffffe00603afd90
[  908.863538]  0xfffffe00603afd90
[  908.865523]  0xfffffe00603afd90

The machine just locked up and kept on printing the same line over and
over again. This patch fixes it.

Signed-off-by: Mikulas Patocka 
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon

arm64: fix unwind_frame() for filtered out fn for function graph tracing

2018-02-23T13:46:38+00:00

do_task_stat() calls get_wchan(), which further does unwind_frame().
unwind_frame() restores frame->pc to original value in case function
graph tracer has modified a return address (LR) in a stack frame to hook
a function return. However, if function graph tracer has hit a filtered
function, then we can't unwind it as ftrace_push_return_trace() has
biased the index(frame->graph) with a 'huge negative'
offset(-FTRACE_NOTRACE_DEPTH).

Moreover, arm64 stack walker defines index(frame->graph) as unsigned
int, which can not compare a -ve number.

Similar problem we can have with calling of walk_stackframe() from
save_stack_trace_tsk() or dump_backtrace().

This patch fixes unwind_frame() to test the index for -ve value and
restore index accordingly before we can restore frame->pc.

Reproducer:

cd /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/
echo schedule > set_graph_notrace
echo 1 > options/display-graph
echo wakeup > current_tracer
ps -ef | grep -i agent

Above commands result in:
Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address ffff801bd3d1e000
pgd = ffff8003cbe97c00
[ffff801bd3d1e000] *pgd=0000000000000000, *pud=0000000000000000
Internal error: Oops: 96000006 [#1] SMP
[...]
CPU: 5 PID: 11696 Comm: ps Not tainted 4.11.0+ #33
[...]
task: ffff8003c21ba000 task.stack: ffff8003cc6c0000
PC is at unwind_frame+0x12c/0x180
LR is at get_wchan+0xd4/0x134
pc : [] lr : [] pstate: 60000145
sp : ffff8003cc6c3ab0
x29: ffff8003cc6c3ab0 x28: 0000000000000001
x27: 0000000000000026 x26: 0000000000000026
x25: 00000000000012d8 x24: 0000000000000000
x23: ffff8003c1c04000 x22: ffff000008c83000
x21: ffff8003c1c00000 x20: 000000000000000f
x19: ffff8003c1bc0000 x18: 0000fffffc593690
x17: 0000000000000000 x16: 0000000000000001
x15: 0000b855670e2b60 x14: 0003e97f22cf1d0f
x13: 0000000000000001 x12: 0000000000000000
x11: 00000000e8f4883e x10: 0000000154f47ec8
x9 : 0000000070f367c0 x8 : 0000000000000000
x7 : 00008003f7290000 x6 : 0000000000000018
x5 : 0000000000000000 x4 : ffff8003c1c03cb0
x3 : ffff8003c1c03ca0 x2 : 00000017ffe80000
x1 : ffff8003cc6c3af8 x0 : ffff8003d3e9e000

Process ps (pid: 11696, stack limit = 0xffff8003cc6c0000)
Stack: (0xffff8003cc6c3ab0 to 0xffff8003cc6c4000)
[...]
[] unwind_frame+0x12c/0x180
[] do_task_stat+0x864/0x870
[] proc_tgid_stat+0x3c/0x48
[] proc_single_show+0x5c/0xb8
[] seq_read+0x160/0x414
[] __vfs_read+0x58/0x164
[] vfs_read+0x88/0x144
[] SyS_read+0x60/0xc0
[] __sys_trace_return+0x0/0x4

Fixes: 20380bb390a4 (arm64: ftrace: fix a stack tracer's output under function graph tracer)
Signed-off-by: Pratyush Anand 
Signed-off-by: Jerome Marchand 
[catalin.marinas@arm.com: replace WARN_ON with WARN_ON_ONCE]
Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas

arm64: stacktrace: avoid listing stacktrace functions in stacktrace

2017-09-14T01:53:16+00:00

The stacktraces always begin as follows:

  [] save_stack_trace_tsk+0x0/0x98
  [] save_stack_trace+0x24/0x28
  ...

This is because the stack trace code includes the stack frames for
itself.  This is incorrect behaviour, and also leads to "skip" doing the
wrong thing (which is the number of stack frames to avoid recording.)

Perversely, it does the right thing when passed a non-current thread.
Fix this by ensuring that we have a known constant number of frames
above the main stack trace function, and always skip these.

This was fixed for arch arm by commit 3683f44c42e9 ("ARM: stacktrace:
avoid listing stacktrace functions in stacktrace")

Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1504078343-28754-1-git-send-email-guptap@codeaurora.org
Signed-off-by: Prakash Gupta 
Cc: Russell King 
Cc: Michal Hocko 
Cc: Vlastimil Babka 
Cc: Will Deacon 
Cc: Catalin Marinas 
Cc: Joonsoo Kim 
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton 
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

arm64: add on_accessible_stack()

2017-08-15T17:36:12+00:00

Both unwind_frame() and dump_backtrace() try to check whether a stack
address is sane to access, with very similar logic. Both will need
updating in order to handle overflow stacks.

Factor out this logic into a helper, so that we can avoid further
duplication when we add overflow stacks.

Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland 
Reviewed-by: Will Deacon 
Tested-by: Laura Abbott 
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel 
Cc: Catalin Marinas 
Cc: James Morse

arm64: unwind: remove sp from struct stackframe

2017-08-09T13:10:29+00:00

The unwind code sets the sp member of struct stackframe to
'frame pointer + 0x10' unconditionally, without regard for whether
doing so produces a legal value. So let's simply remove it now that
we have stopped using it anyway.

Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel 
Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland 
Cc: Catalin Marinas 
Cc: James Morse 
Cc: Will Deacon

arm64: unwind: reference pt_regs via embedded stack frame

2017-08-09T13:07:13+00:00

As it turns out, the unwind code is slightly broken, and probably has
been for a while. The problem is in the dumping of the exception stack,
which is intended to dump the contents of the pt_regs struct at each
level in the call stack where an exception was taken and routed to a
routine marked as __exception (which means its stack frame is right
below the pt_regs struct on the stack).

'Right below the pt_regs struct' is ill defined, though: the unwind
code assigns 'frame pointer + 0x10' to the .sp member of the stackframe
struct at each level, and dump_backtrace() happily dereferences that as
the pt_regs pointer when encountering an __exception routine. However,
the actual size of the stack frame created by this routine (which could
be one of many __exception routines we have in the kernel) is not known,
and so frame.sp is pretty useless to figure out where struct pt_regs
really is.

So it seems the only way to ensure that we can find our struct pt_regs
when walking the stack frames is to put it at a known fixed offset of
the stack frame pointer that is passed to such __exception routines.
The simplest way to do that is to put it inside pt_regs itself, which is
the main change implemented by this patch. As a bonus, doing this allows
us to get rid of a fair amount of cruft related to walking from one stack
to the other, which is especially nice since we intend to introduce yet
another stack for overflow handling once we add support for vmapped
stacks. It also fixes an inconsistency where we only add a stack frame
pointing to ELR_EL1 if we are executing from the IRQ stack but not when
we are executing from the task stack.

To consistly identify exceptions regs even in the presence of exceptions
taken from entry code, we must check whether the next frame was created
by entry text, rather than whether the current frame was crated by
exception text.

To avoid backtracing using PCs that fall in the idmap, or are controlled
by userspace, we must explcitly zero the FP and LR in startup paths, and
must ensure that the frame embedded in pt_regs is zeroed upon entry from
EL0. To avoid these NULL entries showin in the backtrace, unwind_frame()
is updated to avoid them.

Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel 
[Mark: compare current frame against .entry.text, avoid bogus PCs]
Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland 
Cc: Catalin Marinas 
Cc: James Morse 
Cc: Will Deacon

arm64: unwind: disregard frame.sp when validating frame pointer

2017-08-08T15:28:26+00:00

Currently, when unwinding the call stack, we validate the frame pointer
of each frame against frame.sp, whose value is not clearly defined, and
which makes it more difficult to link stack frames together across
different stacks. It is far better to simply check whether the frame
pointer itself points into a valid stack.

Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel 
Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland 
Cc: Catalin Marinas 
Cc: James Morse 
Cc: Will Deacon

arm64: unwind: avoid percpu indirection for irq stack

2017-08-08T15:28:25+00:00

Our IRQ_STACK_PTR() and on_irq_stack() helpers both take a cpu argument,
used to generate a percpu address. In all cases, they are passed
{raw_,}smp_processor_id(), so this parameter is redundant.

Since {raw_,}smp_processor_id() use a percpu variable internally, this
approach means we generate a percpu offset to find the current cpu, then
use this to index an array of percpu offsets, which we then use to find
the current CPU's IRQ stack pointer. Thus, most of the work is
redundant.

Instead, we can consistently use raw_cpu_ptr() to generate the CPU's
irq_stack pointer by simply adding the percpu offset to the irq_stack
address, which is simpler in both respects.

Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland 
Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel 
Cc: Catalin Marinas 
Cc: James Morse 
Cc: Will Deacon