x86/unwind/orc: Fix unwind_get_return_address_ptr() for inactive tasks
Normally, show_trace_log_lvl() scans the stack, looking for text addresses to print. In parallel, it unwinds the stack with unwind_next_frame(). If the stack address matches the pointer returned by unwind_get_return_address_ptr() for the current frame, the text address is printed normally without a question mark. Otherwise it's considered a breadcrumb (potentially from a previous call path) and it's printed with a question mark to indicate that the address is unreliable and typically can be ignored. Since the following commit: f1d9a2ab ("x86/unwind/orc: Don't skip the first frame for inactive tasks") ... for inactive tasks, show_trace_log_lvl() prints *only* unreliable addresses (prepended with '?'). That happens because, for the first frame of an inactive task, unwind_get_return_address_ptr() returns the wrong return address pointer: one word *below* the task stack pointer. show_trace_log_lvl() starts scanning at the stack pointer itself, so it never finds the first 'reliable' address, causing only guesses to being printed. The first frame of an inactive task isn't a normal stack frame. It's actually just an instance of 'struct inactive_task_frame' which is left behind by __switch_to_asm(). Now that this inactive frame is actually exposed to callers, fix unwind_get_return_address_ptr() to interpret it properly. Fixes: f1d9a2ab ("x86/unwind/orc: Don't skip the first frame for inactive tasks") Reported-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> Signed-off-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200522135435.vbxs7umku5pyrdbk@treble
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment