[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080109231620.GA9002@osiris.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 00:16:21 +0100
From: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
To: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@...il.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, hskinnemoen@...el.com,
schwidefsky@...ibm.com, tony.luck@...el.com,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
David Wilder <dwilder@...ibm.com>, jkenisto@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4] kprobes: Introduce kprobe_handle_fault()
> arch/avr32/mm/fault.c | 21 +--------------------
> arch/ia64/mm/fault.c | 24 +-----------------------
> arch/powerpc/mm/fault.c | 25 +------------------------
> arch/s390/mm/fault.c | 25 +------------------------
> arch/sparc64/mm/fault.c | 23 +----------------------
> arch/x86/mm/fault_64.c | 23 ++---------------------
> include/linux/kprobes.h | 17 +++++++++++++++++
> 7 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 134 deletions(-)
Somehow I think you missed arch/x86/mm/fault_32.c :)
> This uncovered a possible bug in the s390 version as that purely
> copied the x86 version unconditionally passing 14 as the trapnr
> rather than the error_code parameter.
> diff --git a/arch/s390/mm/fault.c b/arch/s390/mm/fault.c
> index 2456b52..a9033cf 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/mm/fault.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/mm/fault.c
> @@ -51,29 +51,6 @@ extern int sysctl_userprocess_debug;
>
> extern void die(const char *,struct pt_regs *,long);
>
> -#ifdef CONFIG_KPROBES
> -static inline int notify_page_fault(struct pt_regs *regs, long err)
> -{
> - int ret = 0;
> -
> - /* kprobe_running() needs smp_processor_id() */
> - if (!user_mode(regs)) {
> - preempt_disable();
> - if (kprobe_running() && kprobe_fault_handler(regs, 14))
> - ret = 1;
> - preempt_enable();
> - }
> -
> - return ret;
> -}
> -#else
> -static inline int notify_page_fault(struct pt_regs *regs, long err)
> -{
> - return 0;
> -}
> -#endif
> -
> -
> /*
> * Unlock any spinlocks which will prevent us from getting the
> * message out.
> @@ -309,7 +286,7 @@ do_exception(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long error_code, int write)
> int si_code;
> int fault;
>
> - if (notify_page_fault(regs, error_code))
> + if (kprobe_handle_fault(regs, 14))
> return;
Uhm.. yes. 14 is HFP-Significance exception. That doesn't make too much
sense. Passing error_code here would be the right thing to do.
Also I just checked with David Wilder: system tap itself doesn't have any
fault handlers. So it should be safe to change this.
--
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