[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071217142235.GA21379@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 19:52:35 +0530
From: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Maneesh Soni <maneesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
srinivasa@...ibm.com, Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ibm.com>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <hiramatu@....hitachi.co.jp>,
Rusty Lynch <rusty.lynch@...el.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
Keshavamurthy Anil S <anil.s.keshavamurthy@...el.com>
Subject: Re: FInal kprobes rollup patches
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> [2007-12-15 14:12:04]:
Hi Ingo, Harvey
In file include/asm-x86/kprobes_32.h
typedef u8 kprobe_opcode_t;
hence sizeof(kprobe_opcode_t) turns out to be 1.
Hence
memcpy(p->ainsn.insn, p->addr, MAX_INSN_SIZE * sizeof(kprobe_opcode_t));
is correct.
--
Regards
Srikar
>
> * Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > If you compare this memcpy from arch_prepare_kprobe in 32/64 bit I'm
> > almost sure the X86_32 version should be
> >
> > ... + sizeof(kprobe_opcode_t)
> >
> > not
> >
> > ... * sizeof(kprobe_opcode_t)
>
> good point. I've Cc:-ed the top authors of kprobes.c. Could anyone
> confirm (or deny) that Harvey found a real kprobes bug here?
>
> Ingo
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists