linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/7] ftrace, ppc: convert to new dynamic ftrace arch API

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

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0811171045070.2919@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date:	Mon, 17 Nov 2008 10:47:34 -0500 (EST)
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Pekka Paalanen <pq@....fi>, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] ftrace, ppc: convert to new dynamic ftrace arch
 API


On Mon, 17 Nov 2008, Paul Mackerras wrote:

> Steven Rostedt writes:
> 
> > +static int test_24bit_addr(unsigned long ip, unsigned long addr)
> > +{
> > +	unsigned long diff;
> > +
> > +	/* can we get to addr from ip in 24 bits? */
> > +	diff = ip > addr ? ip - addr : addr - ip;
> > +
> > +	return !(diff & ((unsigned long)-1 << 24));
> 
> Since a branch instruction can reach +/- 32MB, the 24 needs to be 25.
> It's 25 not 26 since you have effectively accounted for one bit by
> taking the absolute value of the offset.  Also, this will say that an
> offset of -0x2000000 is out of range whereas it is just in range.
> That probably doesn't matter unless you're relying on this to give
> exactly the same answer in all cases as tests done elsewhere (e.g. in
> module_64.c).

I'll update this to be correct.

> 
> Note that the address difference being too large isn't the only reason
> for a procedure call to go via a trampoline on ppc64.  A trampoline is
> also needed when the called function uses a different TOC from the
> caller.  The most obvious example of this is when the caller is in a
> module and the callee is in the main kernel or another module.
> 
> Currently all functions in the main kernel use the same TOC, but the
> linker is capable of dividing up a large executable into groups of
> functions and assigning a different TOC to each group, in order to
> avoid any of the TOCs getting too large (a TOC is limited to 64kB).
> If the linker does that, it automatically inserts trampolines to
> handle the TOC change.

OK, I'll deal with that at a another time. If this does happen in core 
kernel code, it will produce a nice warning and nicely shutdown ftrace, 
without causing any harm. Then I can deal with the bug report.

-- Steve


--
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/