linux-kernel - Re: [BUGFIX] Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] perf-probe: Support probing on offline cross-arch binary

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 9 Sep 2016 12:43:22 -0300
From:   Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To:     Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc:     Wang Nan <wangnan0@...wei.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [BUGFIX] Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] perf-probe: Support probing on
 offline cross-arch binary

Em Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 12:28:07AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu escreveu:
> On Fri, 9 Sep 2016 11:59:55 -0300
> Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org> wrote:
> > # diff /tmp/fail /tmp/ok
> > <SNIP>
> > -Writing event: p:perf_bpf_probe/func _text+5197232 f_mode=+68(%di):x32 offset=%si:s64 orig=dx:s32
> > -Failed to write event: Invalid argument
> > -bpf_probe: failed to apply perf probe eventsFailed to add events selected by BPF
> > +Writing event: p:perf_bpf_probe/func _text+5197232 f_mode=+68(%di):x32 offset=%si:s64 orig=%dx:s32
> > <SNIP>

> > Fixed by this patch:

> > +++ b/tools/perf/arch/x86/include/dwarf-regs-table.h
> > @@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ static const char * const x86_32_regstr_tbl[] = {
> >  };

> >  static const char * const x86_64_regstr_tbl[] = {
> > -	"%ax", "dx", "%cx", "%bx", "%si", "%di",
> > +	"%ax", "%dx", "%cx", "%bx", "%si", "%di",
> >  	"%bp", "%sp", "%r8", "%r9", "%r10", "%r11",
> >  	"%r12", "%r13", "%r14", "%r15",
> >  };
 
> Oops, it's my typo... thank you for reporting and fixing!

Right, but it was my fault as well, I should've payed attention to the
output of 'perf test' and replied to you so that you could figure this
out and resend.

Anyway, its good that this gets exercised by that test, its just a
matter of us making sure that no regressions appear on 'perf test'
before pushing things upstream.
 
> Acked-by: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>

Thanks, added it to the patch.

- Arnaldo

- Arnaldo