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]
Date:	Thu, 16 Aug 2012 07:41:53 +1000
From:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc:	Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>, michael@...erman.id.au,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, peterz@...radead.org,
	Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] powerpc: Uprobes port to powerpc

On Wed, 2012-08-15 at 18:59 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 07/26, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
> >
> > From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>
> >
> > This is the port of uprobes to powerpc. Usage is similar to x86.
> 
> I am just curious why this series was ignored by powerpc maintainers...

Because it arrived too late for the previous merge window considering my
limited bandwidth for reviewing things and that nobody else seems to
have reviewed it :-)

It's still on track for the next one, and I'm hoping to dedicate most of
next week going through patches & doing a powerpc -next.

> Of course I can not review this code, I know nothing about powerpc,
> but the patches look simple/straightforward.
> 
> Paul, Benjamin?
> 
> Just one question... Shouldn't arch_uprobe_pre_xol() forbid to probe
> UPROBE_SWBP_INSN (at least) ?
> 
> (I assume that emulate_step() can't handle this case but of course I
>  do not understand arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c)
> 
> Note that uprobe_pre_sstep_notifier() sets utask->state = UTASK_BP_HIT
> without any checks. This doesn't look right if it was UTASK_SSTEP...
> 
> But again, I do not know what powepc will actually do if we try to
> single-step over UPROBE_SWBP_INSN.

Ananth ?

Cheers,
Ben.


--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ