Re: [PATCH 0/8] unwind, arm64: add sframe unwinder for kernel

Song Liu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups org.kernel.vger.linux-toolchains,org.infradead.lists.linux-arm-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.live-patching
Message-ID <CAPhsuW7dV7UR3PsGVx_DLBH5-95DAmLMGTPuY0NfUwWLZMSTrQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 11:46 PM Puranjay Mohan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Song Liu <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 6:45 PM Josh Poimboeuf <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 06:36:04PM -0800, Song Liu wrote:
> >> > > > [   81.261748]  copy_process+0xfdc/0xfd58 [livepatch_special_static]
> >> > >
> >> > > Does that copy_process+0xfdc/0xfd58 resolve to this line in
> >> > > copy_process()?
> >> > >
> >> > >                         refcount_inc(&current->signal->sigcnt);
> >> > >
> >> > > Maybe the klp rela reference to 'current' is bogus, or resolving to the
> >> > > wrong address somehow?
> >> >
> >> > It resolves the following line.
> >> >
> >> > p->signal->tty = tty_kref_get(current->signal->tty);
> >> >
> >> > I am not quite sure how 'current' should be resolved.
> >>
> >> Hm, on arm64 it looks like the value of 'current' is stored in the
> >> SP_EL0 register.  So I guess that shouldn't need any relocations.
> >>
> >> > The size of copy_process (0xfd58) is wrong. It is only about
> >> > 5.5kB in size. Also, the copy_process function in the .ko file
> >> > looks very broken. I will try a few more things.
> >
> > When I try each step of kpatch-build, the copy_process function
> > looks reasonable (according to gdb-disassemble) in fork.o and
> > output.o. However, copy_process looks weird in livepatch-special-static.o,
> > which is generated by ld:
> >
> > ld -EL  -maarch64linux -z norelro -z noexecstack
> > --no-warn-rwx-segments -T ././kpatch.lds  -r -o
> > livepatch-special-static.o ./patch-hook.o ./output.o
> >
> > I have attached these files to the email. I am not sure whether
> > the email server will let them through.
>
> I think, I am missing something here,
>
> I did :
>
> objdump -Dr livepatch-special-static.o | less
>
> and
>
> objdump -Dr output.o | less
>
> and the disassembly of copy_process() looks exactly same.

Yeah, objdump does show the same disassembly. However, if
I open the file with gdb, and do "disassemble copy_process",
the one in livepatch-special-static.o looks very weird.

Thanks,
Song
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.