Hi Kazu,
totally missed your mail...
On Wed, 8 Sep 2021 09:37:05 +0000
HAGIO KAZUHITO(萩尾 一仁) <k-hagio-ab(a)nec.com> wrote:
 Hi Tao Liu, Philipp
 
 Thanks for the patch and review.
  
[...]
 > > > > > +static void
 > > > > > +symname_hash_remove(struct syment *table[], struct syment
*spn)
 > > > > > +{
 > > > > > +	struct syment *sp, **tmp;
 > > > > > +        int index, first_encounter = 1;
 > > > > > +
 > > > > > +        index = SYMNAME_HASH_INDEX(spn->name);
 > > > > > +	index = index > 0 ? index : -index;
 > > > > > +
 > > > > > +        if ((sp = table[index]) == NULL)
 > > > > > +		return;
 > > > > > +
 > > > > > +	for (tmp = &table[index], sp = table[index]; sp; ) {
 > > > > > +		if (STREQ(sp->name, spn->name)) {
 > > > > > +			if (sp != spn) {
 > > > > > +				sp->cnt--;
 > > > > > +				spn->cnt--;
 > > > > > +			} else if (!first_encounter) {
 > > > > > +				sp->cnt--;
 > > > > > +			} else {
 > > > > > +				*tmp = sp->name_hash_next;
 > > > > > +				first_encounter = 0;
 > > > > > +
 > > > > > +				tmp = &(*tmp)->name_hash_next;
 > > > > > +				sp = sp->name_hash_next;
 > > > > > +				spn->name_hash_next = NULL;
 > > > > > +				continue;
 > > > > > +			}
 > > > > > +		}
 > > > > > +		tmp = &sp->name_hash_next;
 > > > > > +		sp = sp->name_hash_next;  
 > > > >
 > > > > What do you need tmp for? The way I see it you only assign to it but
 > > > > never really use it.
 > > > >  
 > > >
 > > > Since the elements arranged by the hash table are singly linked list.
 > > > If we want to remove a specific element out of the list, we need to
update
 > > > the field which the previous element used to point to the next element.
To
 > > > do that, I keep the address of the previous-element-pointing-to-the-next
field
 > > > into tmp variable,  
 > >
 > > well yes, but in the only case where you use tmp you have sp == spn. So
 > > you already have two pointers to the same element and don't need a third
 > > one to keep the same value.
 > >  
 > > > You can see it is used in code: *tmp = sp->name_hash_next;  
 > >
 > > But in that line you only store the value in tmp. Where do read it from
 > > tmp? I only found this
 > >
 > > tmp = &(*tmp)->name_hash_next;
 > >
 > > but that again stores the new value in tmp. For the scenario you
 > > described above I'd expect to have some lines like this
 > >
 > > tmp = sp->name_hash_next->name_hash_next;
 > > sp->name_hash_next = NULL;
 > > sp = tmp;
 > >  
 > 
 > I tried to elimitate the "tmp" variable but failed, I will be appreciated
if
 > you can do it for me?
 > 
 > My thought was, since struct syment is a singly linked list, sp and spn are used
 > to judge if the element which sp pointing to
 > should be removed from the list or not. To remove sp from the list, the element
 > which prior to sp should point to the element which follows sp. So I need a
 > varible which can always track the element which is prior to sp. The variable
 > "tmp" achieves that, actually it is the field where the prior element
should
 > be updated when removing sp from the list. As you can see, tmp is not equivalent
 > to sp and spn.  
 
 Is that loop replaced with this?  maybe missing something.
 
 if (table[index] == spn)
   table[index] = spn->name_hash_next;
 
 for (sp = table[index]; sp; sp = sp->name_hash_next) {
   if (STREQ(sp->name, spn->name))
     sp->cnt--;
   if (sp->name_hash_next == spn)
     sp->name_hash_next = spn->name_hash_next;
 } 
I think that should work and improve the code quite substantially. 
 (spn will be freed right after this, no need to update?) 
I don't think updating spn is necessary. Updating spn->cnt will grant
you a sanity check as AFAIK it must be zero after the for-loop. Not
sure if it's worth it though.
Thanks
Philipp
 >   
 > > > > > +	}
 > > > > > +}
 > > > > > +
 > > > > >  /*
 > > > > >   *  Static kernel symbol value search
 > > > > >   */
 > > > > >  static struct syment *
 > > > > > -symname_hash_search(char *name)
 > > > > > +symname_hash_search(struct syment *table[], char *name,
 > > > > > +		int (*skip_condition)(struct syment *, char *))  
 > > > >
 > > > > this line should be indented to match the open parentheses after the
 > > > > function name.  
 > > >
 > > > OK.
 > > >  
 > > > >  
 > > > > >  {
 > > > > >  	struct syment *sp;
 > > > > > +	int index;
 > > > > >
 > > > > > -        sp = st->symname_hash[SYMNAME_HASH_INDEX(name)];
 > > > > > +	index = SYMNAME_HASH_INDEX(name);
 > > > > > +	index = index > 0 ? index : -index;
 > > > > > +        sp = table[index];
 > > > > >
 > > > > >  	while (sp) {
 > > > > > +		if (skip_condition && skip_condition(sp, name)) {
 > > > > > +			sp = sp->name_hash_next;
 > > > > > +			continue;
 > > > > > +		}
 > > > > > +
 > > > > >  		if (STREQ(sp->name, name))
 > > > > >  			return sp;
 > > > > >  		sp = sp->name_hash_next;
 > > > > > @@ -1595,6 +1667,7 @@ store_module_symbols_v1(ulong total, int
mods_installed)
 > > > > >  				lm->mod_symend = sp;
 > > > > >  			}
 > > > > >  		}
 > > > > > +		mod_symtable_hash_install_range(lm->mod_symtable,
lm->mod_symend);
 > > > > >  	}
 > > > > >
 > > > > >  	st->flags |= MODULE_SYMS;
 > > > > > @@ -2075,6 +2148,8 @@ store_module_symbols_v2(ulong total, int
mods_installed)
 > > > > >  				lm->mod_init_symend = sp;
 > > > > >  			}
 > > > > >  		}
 > > > > > +		mod_symtable_hash_install_range(lm->mod_symtable,
lm->mod_symend);
 > > > > > +		mod_symtable_hash_install_range(lm->mod_init_symtable,
lm->mod_init_symend);
 > > > > >  	}
 > > > > >
 > > > > >  	st->flags |= MODULE_SYMS;
 > > > > > @@ -4482,6 +4557,16 @@ symbol_query(char *s, char *print_pad,
struct syment **spp)
 > > > > >  	return(cnt);
 > > > > >  }
 > > > > >
 > > > > > +static int
 > > > > > +skip_symbols(struct syment *sp, char *s)
 > > > > > +{
 > > > > > +	int pseudos, skip = 0;
 > > > > > +	pseudos = (strstr(s, "_MODULE_START_") || strstr(s,
"_MODULE_END_") ||
 > > > > > +		strstr(s, "_MODULE_INIT_START_") || strstr(s,
"_MODULE_INIT_END_"));
 > > > > > +	if (!pseudos && MODULE_PSEUDO_SYMBOL(sp))
 > > > > > +		skip = 1;
 > > > > > +	return skip;
 > > > > > +}  
 > > > >
 > > > > It took really long for me to wrap my head around what is happening
 > > > > here but in the end I'm pretty sure that the extra filtering is
 > > > > unnecessary and can simply be dropped without problem. To be fair
 > > > > what you are doing seems correct it's just by cleaning up the
code the
 > > > > problem became more obvious...
 > > > >  
 > > >
 > > > Me too, hard for me to figure out what's going on here. My thought was
don't
 > > > go too far at one step, for now I just tried to keep it as it was. When
 > > > the code is stable enough, then get this part optimized...  
 > >
 > > you are right. Better to make small steps and your change already is a
 > > big improvement.
 > >  
 > > > > Let's see what is happening here:
 > > > >
 > > > > 1) strstr returns a pointer to the start of the second string if is
is
 > > > >    contained in the first one and NULL otherwise. This means
'pseudos'
 > > > >    is true if 's' contains any of the _MODULE_* strings, i.e.
if s is a
 > > > >    pseudo symbol.
 > > > >
 > > > > 2) MODULE_PSEUDO_SYMBOL does basically the same only that it checks
 > > > >    'sp->name' instead of 's' and enforces that the
"_MODULE_*" strings
 > > > >    are at the beginning of the symbol name not just contained in it.
 > > > >
 > > > > Let's look at the different cases
 > > > >
 > > > > 3.1) both 's' and 'sp' are proper, i.e. no pseudo,
symbols
 > > > >      This means skip_symbols returns false so symname_hash_search
 > > > >      doesn't skip the symbol but compares 's' to
'sp->name' to check if
 > > > >      'sp' is the symbol you are searching for. This is
basically the
 > > > >      case you want.
 > > > >
 > > > > 3.2) both 's' and 'sp' are pseudo symbols
 > > > >      Again skip_symbols returns false and symname_hash_search
compares
 > > > >      's' with 'sp->name' to check if 'sp'
is the symbol you are
 > > > >      searching for. I'm not entirely sure if this way
 > > > >      symname_hash_search is intended to be used but I also don't
see a
 > > > >      reason why it shouldn't be done.
 > > > >
 > > > > 3.3) 's' is a pseudo and 'sp' a proper symbol
 > > > >      same like 3.2).
 > > > >
 > > > > 3.4) 's' is a proper symbol and 'sp' a psudo symbol
 > > > >      here skip_symbols returns true and symname_hash_search skips
this
 > > > >      case.
 > > > >
 > > > > So the only case that is filtered out is 3.4 in which 's'
must not
 > > > > contain any '_MODULES_*' while 'sp->name' has to
start with one. But
 > > > > that's something a simple STREQ can handle like in case 3.3. So
what's
 > > > > the point in having this extra filtering?  
 > > >
 > > > As you pointed out, the only case to skip is 3.4): A) s is not pseudo, and
B) sp is psedudo.
 > > > But the "pseudo" of s is different from the "psedudo"
of sp.
 > > >
 > > > Let's say "_MODULE_START_", "_MODULE_END_",
"_MODULE_INIT_START_", "_MODULE_INIT_END_"
 > > > are true pseudo symbols.
 > > >
 > > > For s is not pseudo, s can be one of "proper symbol" and
"_MODULE_SECTION_" symbol.
 > > > For sp is pseudo, sp can be one of "true pseudo symbol" and
"_MODULE_SECTION_" symbol.
 > > >
 > > > Since "proper symbol" and "true pseudo symbol" can
never be the same, so skip it or not doesn't
 > > > matter, it cannot pass the STREQ check later. The only case left is
_MODULE_SECTION_ symbol.
 > > > If s and sp are both _MODULE_SECTION_ symbol, even they are equal string,
it will be skipped.
 > > > From my view it is the only use case for the skip. I agree the code should
be optimized.  
 > >
 > > true, I missed the _MODULE_SECTION_ case... although I'm not sure why
 > > this case should be treated differently to the other _MODULE_* cases...
 > >  
 > 
 > Me neither, just keep it as it was...
 >   
 > > > > >  /*
 > > > > >   *  Return the syment of a symbol.
 > > > > > @@ -4489,58 +4574,16 @@ symbol_query(char *s, char *print_pad,
struct syment **spp)
 > > > > >  struct syment *
 > > > > >  symbol_search(char *s)
 > > > > >  {
 > > > > > -	int i;
 > > > > > -        struct syment *sp_hashed, *sp, *sp_end;
 > > > > > -	struct load_module *lm;
 > > > > > -	int pseudos, search_init;
 > > > > > +        struct syment *sp_hashed, *sp;
 > > > > >
 > > > > > -	sp_hashed = symname_hash_search(s);
 > > > > > +	sp_hashed = symname_hash_search(st->symname_hash, s,
NULL);
 > > > > >
 > > > > >          for (sp = sp_hashed ? sp_hashed : st->symtable; sp
< st->symend; sp++) {
 > > > > >                  if (STREQ(s, sp->name))
 > > > > >                          return(sp);
 > > > > >          }
 > > > > >
 > > > > > -	pseudos = (strstr(s, "_MODULE_START_") || strstr(s,
"_MODULE_END_"));
 > > > > > -	search_init = FALSE;
 > > > > > -
 > > > > > -        for (i = 0; i < st->mods_installed; i++) {
 > > > > > -                lm = &st->load_modules[i];
 > > > > > -		if (lm->mod_flags & MOD_INIT)
 > > > > > -			search_init = TRUE;
 > > > > > -		sp = lm->mod_symtable;
 > > > > > -                sp_end = lm->mod_symend;
 > > > > > -
 > > > > > -                for ( ; sp <= sp_end; sp++) {
 > > > > > -                	if (!pseudos &&
MODULE_PSEUDO_SYMBOL(sp))
 > > > > > -                        	continue;
 > > > > > -                	if (STREQ(s, sp->name))
 > > > > > -                        	return(sp);
 > > > > > -                }
 > > > > > -        }
 > > > > > -
 > > > > > -	if (!search_init)
 > > > > > -		return((struct syment *)NULL);
 > > > > > -
 > > > > > -	pseudos = (strstr(s, "_MODULE_INIT_START_") ||
strstr(s, "_MODULE_INIT_END_"));
 > > > > > -
 > > > > > -	for (i = 0; i < st->mods_installed; i++) {
 > > > > > -		lm = &st->load_modules[i];
 > > > > > -		if (!lm->mod_init_symtable)
 > > > > > -			continue;
 > > > > > -		sp = lm->mod_init_symtable;
 > > > > > -		sp_end = lm->mod_init_symend;
 > > > > > -
 > > > > > -		for ( ; sp < sp_end; sp++) {
 > > > > > -			if (!pseudos && MODULE_PSEUDO_SYMBOL(sp))
 > > > > > -				continue;
 > > > > > -
 > > > > > -			if (STREQ(s, sp->name))
 > > > > > -				return(sp);
 > > > > > -		}
 > > > > > -	}
 > > > > > -
 > > > > > -        return((struct syment *)NULL);
 > > > > > +	return symname_hash_search(st->mod_symname_hash, s,
skip_symbols);
 > > > > >  }
 > > > > >
 > > > > >  /*
 > > > > > @@ -5432,33 +5475,13 @@ value_symbol(ulong value)
 > > > > >  int
 > > > > >  symbol_exists(char *symbol)
 > > > > >  {
 > > > > > -	int i;
 > > > > > -        struct syment *sp, *sp_end;
 > > > > > -	struct load_module *lm;
 > > > > > +        struct syment *sp;
 > > > > >
 > > > > > -	if ((sp = symname_hash_search(symbol)))
 > > > > > +	if ((sp = symname_hash_search(st->symname_hash, symbol,
NULL)))
 > > > > >  		return TRUE;
 > > > > >
 > > > > > -        for (i = 0; i < st->mods_installed; i++) {
 > > > > > -                lm = &st->load_modules[i];
 > > > > > -		sp = lm->mod_symtable;
 > > > > > -                sp_end = lm->mod_symend;
 > > > > > -
 > > > > > -                for ( ; sp < sp_end; sp++) {
 > > > > > -                	if (STREQ(symbol, sp->name))
 > > > > > -                        	return(TRUE);
 > > > > > -                }
 > > > > > -
 > > > > > -		if (lm->mod_init_symtable) {
 > > > > > -			sp = lm->mod_init_symtable;
 > > > > > -			sp_end = lm->mod_init_symend;
 > > > > > -
 > > > > > -			for ( ; sp < sp_end; sp++) {
 > > > > > -				if (STREQ(symbol, sp->name))
 > > > > > -					return(TRUE);
 > > > > > -			}
 > > > > > -		}
 > > > > > -	}
 > > > > > +	if ((sp = symname_hash_search(st->mod_symname_hash, symbol,
NULL)))
 > > > > > +		return TRUE;
 > > > > >
 > > > > >          return(FALSE);
 > > > > >  }  
 > > > >
 > > > > Isn't this function basically identical to symbol_search and thus
can
 > > > > be abbreviated to
 > > > >
 > > > > 	return !!(symbol_search(symbol));  
 > > >
 > > > In the original symbol_search, there are 3 stages to find a symbol:
 > > > 1) search in kernel symbols hash table.
 > > > 2) iterate over all kernel symbols.
 > > > 3) iterate over all kernel mods and their symbols.
 > > >
 > > > As for symbol_exists, it only do 1) 3) stages. Personally I think stage 2)
is
 > > > unnecessary, but I didn't have a strong reason to remove it. Thus I
didn't
 > > > replace symbol_exists with symbol_search directly. If stage 2) can be
removed,
 > > > then I'm OK with your modification.  
 > >
 > > you are right. Better wait till case 2) got removed properly. Otherwise
 > > we might introduce a bug now...
 > >  
 > > > > > @@ -5515,7 +5538,7 @@ kernel_symbol_exists(char *symbol)
 > > > > >  {
 > > > > >  	struct syment *sp;
 > > > > >
 > > > > > -        if ((sp = symname_hash_search(symbol)))
 > > > > > +        if ((sp = symname_hash_search(st->symname_hash,
symbol, NULL)))
 > > > > >                  return TRUE;
 > > > > >  	else
 > > > > >          	return FALSE;  
 > > > >
 > > > > same like above. This could be abbreviated to
 > > > >
 > > > > 	return !!(symname_hash_search(st->symname_hash, symbol, NULL));
 > > > >  
 > > >
 > > > Agreed, this one can be replaced this way.
 > > >  
 > > > > > @@ -5527,7 +5550,7 @@ kernel_symbol_exists(char *symbol)
 > > > > >  struct syment *
 > > > > >  kernel_symbol_search(char *symbol)
 > > > > >  {
 > > > > > -	return symname_hash_search(symbol);
 > > > > > +	return symname_hash_search(st->symname_hash, symbol,
NULL);
 > > > > >  }
 > > > > >
 > > > > >  /*
 > > > > > @@ -12464,8 +12487,10 @@ store_load_module_symbols(bfd *bfd, int
dynamic, void *minisyms,
 > > > > >  		error(INFO, "%s: last symbol: %s is not
_MODULE_END_%s?\n",
 > > > > >  			lm->mod_name, lm->mod_load_symend->name,
lm->mod_name);
 > > > > >
 > > > > > +	mod_symtable_hash_remove_range(lm->mod_symtable,
lm->mod_symend);
 > > > > >          lm->mod_symtable = lm->mod_load_symtable;
 > > > > >          lm->mod_symend = lm->mod_load_symend;
 > > > > > +	mod_symtable_hash_install_range(lm->mod_symtable,
lm->mod_symend);
 > > > > >
 > > > > >  	lm->mod_flags &= ~MOD_EXT_SYMS;
 > > > > >  	lm->mod_flags |= MOD_LOAD_SYMS;
 > > > > > @@ -12495,6 +12520,7 @@ delete_load_module(ulong base_addr)
 > > > > >          			req->name = lm->mod_namelist;
 > > > > >          			gdb_interface(req);
 > > > > >  			}
 > > > > > +			mod_symtable_hash_remove_range(lm->mod_symtable,
lm->mod_symend);
 > > > > >  			if (lm->mod_load_symtable) {
 > > > > >                          	free(lm->mod_load_symtable);
 > > > > >                                  namespace_ctl(NAMESPACE_FREE,
 > > > > > @@ -12504,6 +12530,7 @@ delete_load_module(ulong base_addr)
 > > > > >  				unlink_module(lm);
 > > > > >  			lm->mod_symtable = lm->mod_ext_symtable;
 > > > > >  			lm->mod_symend = lm->mod_ext_symend;
 > > > > > +			mod_symtable_hash_install_range(lm->mod_symtable,
lm->mod_symend);
 > > > > >  			lm->mod_flags &=
~(MOD_LOAD_SYMS|MOD_REMOTE|MOD_NOPATCH);
 > > > > >  			lm->mod_flags |= MOD_EXT_SYMS;
 > > > > >  			lm->mod_load_symtable = NULL;
 > > > > > @@ -12532,6 +12559,7 @@ delete_load_module(ulong base_addr)
 > > > > >                          	req->name = lm->mod_namelist;
 > > > > >                          	gdb_interface(req);
 > > > > >  			}
 > > > > > +			mod_symtable_hash_remove_range(lm->mod_symtable,
lm->mod_symend);
 > > > > >  			if (lm->mod_load_symtable) {
 > > > > >                          	free(lm->mod_load_symtable);
 > > > > >  				namespace_ctl(NAMESPACE_FREE,
 > > > > > @@ -12541,6 +12569,7 @@ delete_load_module(ulong base_addr)
 > > > > >  				unlink_module(lm);
 > > > > >  			lm->mod_symtable = lm->mod_ext_symtable;
 > > > > >  			lm->mod_symend = lm->mod_ext_symend;
 > > > > > +			mod_symtable_hash_install_range(lm->mod_symtable,
lm->mod_symend);
 > > > > >                          lm->mod_flags &=
~(MOD_LOAD_SYMS|MOD_REMOTE|MOD_NOPATCH);
 > > > > >                          lm->mod_flags |= MOD_EXT_SYMS;
 > > > > >                          lm->mod_load_symtable = NULL;  
 > > > >
 > > > > I must admit I don't understand how the last two functions work,
so I'm
 > > > > relying on Kazu to comment on those.  
 > > >
 > > > The difference of mod symbols and kernel symbols, is that kernel symbols
will not change after loaded
 > > > into hash table, mod symbols can get modified by "mod" cmd.
Whenever mod symbols changed, it should
 > > > be synced to mod symbols hash table. The above changed lines are trying to
do that.  
 > >
 > > Thanks for the explanation. However, my main problem is less what it
 > > does but more how it does it.
 > >
 > > For example in delete_load_module first all symbols from lm->mod_symtab
 > > are removed. Then lm->mod_symtab is changed to lm->mod_ext_symtab and
 > > then all symbols are installed again. Why? What's the difference
 > > between the mod_symtab and mod_ext_symtab? At least when looking at
 > > store_module_symbols_v{1,2} both should be the same...  
 > 
 > No, lm->mod_symtable and lm->mod_ext_symtable are not always the same.
 > lm->mod_symtable will be assigned to lm->mod_load_symtable in
 > symbols.c:store_load_module_symbols. When invoke 'mod -S/-s' in crash,
 > the modules(.ko) will be read into, the symbols will get refreshed. If 'mod
-d'
 > remove the modules, the symbols will be restored to mod_ext_symtable.
 > 
 > My understanding is, lm->mod_ext_symtable is read from vmcore, and
 > lm->mod_load_symtable is read from (.ko) file. Though mostly the symbols
 > are the same, but we cannot guarantee that...  
 
 Right, probably if no CONFIG_KALLSYMS, the number of symbols in
 lm->mod_ext_symtable will be less than lm->mod_load_symbable.
 
 Thanks,
 Kazu