[PATCH] Powerpc/Watchpoint: Restore nvgprs while returning from exception
Michael Ellerman
mpe at ellerman.id.au
Fri Jun 7 15:50:21 AEST 2019
Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria at linux.ibm.com> writes:
> Powerpc hw triggers watchpoint before executing the instruction.
> To make trigger-after-execute behavior, kernel emulates the
> instruction. If the instruction is 'load something into non-
> volatile register', exception handler should restore emulated
> register state while returning back, otherwise there will be
> register state corruption. Ex, Adding a watchpoint on a list
> can corrput the list:
>
> # cat /proc/kallsyms | grep kthread_create_list
> c00000000121c8b8 d kthread_create_list
>
> Add watchpoint on kthread_create_list->next:
>
> # perf record -e mem:0xc00000000121c8c0
>
> Run some workload such that new kthread gets invoked. Ex, I
> just logged out from console:
>
> list_add corruption. next->prev should be prev (c000000001214e00), \
> but was c00000000121c8b8. (next=c00000000121c8b8).
> WARNING: CPU: 59 PID: 309 at lib/list_debug.c:25 __list_add_valid+0xb4/0xc0
> CPU: 59 PID: 309 Comm: kworker/59:0 Kdump: loaded Not tainted 5.1.0-rc7+ #69
> ...
> NIP __list_add_valid+0xb4/0xc0
> LR __list_add_valid+0xb0/0xc0
> Call Trace:
> __list_add_valid+0xb0/0xc0 (unreliable)
> __kthread_create_on_node+0xe0/0x260
> kthread_create_on_node+0x34/0x50
> create_worker+0xe8/0x260
> worker_thread+0x444/0x560
> kthread+0x160/0x1a0
> ret_from_kernel_thread+0x5c/0x70
This all depends on what code the compiler generates for the list
access. Can you include a disassembly of the relevant code in your
kernel so we have an example of the bad case.
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/exceptions-64s.S b/arch/powerpc/kernel/exceptions-64s.S
> index 9481a11..96de0d1 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/exceptions-64s.S
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/exceptions-64s.S
> @@ -1753,7 +1753,7 @@ handle_dabr_fault:
> ld r5,_DSISR(r1)
> addi r3,r1,STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD
> bl do_break
> -12: b ret_from_except_lite
> +12: b ret_from_except
This probably warrants a comment explaining why we can't use the (badly
named) "lite" version.
cheers
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list