From: Jiping Ma <jiping.ma2@windriver.com>
Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 10:52:07 +0800
Subject: arm64: perf: Report the PC value in REGS_ABI_32 mode
Git-commit: 8dfe804a4031ca6ba3a3efb2048534249b64f3a5
Patch-mainline: v5.8-rc3
References: git-fixes

A 32-bit perf querying the registers of a compat task using REGS_ABI_32
will receive zeroes from w15, when it expects to find the PC.

Return the PC value for register dwarf register 15 when returning register
values for a compat task to perf.

Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Acked-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Jiping Ma <jiping.ma2@windriver.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1589165527-188401-1-git-send-email-jiping.ma2@windriver.com
[will: Shuffled code and added a comment]
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Ivan T. Ivanov <iivanov@suse.de>
---
 arch/arm64/kernel/perf_regs.c |   25 ++++++++++++++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_regs.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/perf_regs.c
@@ -15,15 +15,34 @@ u64 perf_reg_value(struct pt_regs *regs,
 		return 0;
 
 	/*
-	 * Compat (i.e. 32 bit) mode:
-	 * - PC has been set in the pt_regs struct in kernel_entry,
-	 * - Handle SP and LR here.
+	 * Our handling of compat tasks (PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_ABI_32) is weird, but
+	 * we're stuck with it for ABI compatability reasons.
+	 *
+	 * For a 32-bit consumer inspecting a 32-bit task, then it will look at
+	 * the first 16 registers (see arch/arm/include/uapi/asm/perf_regs.h).
+	 * These correspond directly to a prefix of the registers saved in our
+	 * 'struct pt_regs', with the exception of the PC, so we copy that down
+	 * (x15 corresponds to SP_hyp in the architecture).
+	 *
+	 * So far, so good.
+	 *
+	 * The oddity arises when a 64-bit consumer looks at a 32-bit task and
+	 * asks for registers beyond PERF_REG_ARM_MAX. In this case, we return
+	 * SP_usr, LR_usr and PC in the positions where the AArch64 SP, LR and
+	 * PC registers would normally live. The initial idea was to allow a
+	 * 64-bit unwinder to unwind a 32-bit task and, although it's not clear
+	 * how well that works in practice, somebody might be relying on it.
+	 *
+	 * At the time we make a sample, we don't know whether the consumer is
+	 * 32-bit or 64-bit, so we have to cater for both possibilities.
 	 */
 	if (compat_user_mode(regs)) {
 		if ((u32)idx == PERF_REG_ARM64_SP)
 			return regs->compat_sp;
 		if ((u32)idx == PERF_REG_ARM64_LR)
 			return regs->compat_lr;
+		if (idx == 15)
+			return regs->pc;
 	}
 
 	if ((u32)idx == PERF_REG_ARM64_SP)