[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150812144738.GG23540@arm.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 15:47:38 +0100
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To: David Long <dave.long@...aro.org>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@....com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
"sandeepa.s.prabhu@...il.com" <sandeepa.s.prabhu@...il.com>,
William Cohen <wcohen@...hat.com>,
Steve Capper <steve.capper@...aro.org>,
"Jon Medhurst (Tixy)" <tixy@...aro.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
Anil S Keshavamurthy <anil.s.keshavamurthy@...el.com>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 5/7] arm64: Add trampoline code for kretprobes
Hi Will,
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 01:52:42AM +0100, David Long wrote:
> From: William Cohen <wcohen@...hat.com>
>
> The trampoline code is used by kretprobes to capture a return from a probed
> function. This is done by saving the registers, calling the handler, and
> restoring the registers. The code then returns to the original saved caller
> return address. It is necessary to do this directly instead of using a
> software breakpoint because the code used in processing that breakpoint
> could itself be kprobe'd and cause a problematic reentry into the debug
> exception handler.
>
> Signed-off-by: William Cohen <wcohen@...hat.com>
> Signed-off-by: David A. Long <dave.long@...aro.org>
[...]
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/kprobes_trampoline.S b/arch/arm64/kernel/kprobes_trampoline.S
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..dd0172b
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/kprobes_trampoline.S
> @@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
> +/*
> + * trampoline entry and return code for kretprobes.
> + */
> +
> +#include <linux/linkage.h>
> +#include <generated/asm-offsets.h>
> +
> + .text
> +
> +ENTRY(kretprobe_trampoline)
> +
> + sub sp, sp, #S_FRAME_SIZE
> +
> + stp x0, x1, [sp, #S_X0]
> + stp x2, x3, [sp, #S_X2]
> + stp x4, x5, [sp, #S_X4]
> + stp x6, x7, [sp, #S_X6]
> + stp x8, x9, [sp, #S_X8]
> + stp x10, x11, [sp, #S_X10]
> + stp x12, x13, [sp, #S_X12]
> + stp x14, x15, [sp, #S_X14]
> + stp x16, x17, [sp, #S_X16]
> + stp x18, x19, [sp, #S_X18]
> + stp x20, x21, [sp, #S_X20]
> + stp x22, x23, [sp, #S_X22]
> + stp x24, x25, [sp, #S_X24]
> + stp x26, x27, [sp, #S_X26]
> + stp x28, x29, [sp, #S_X28]
> + str x30, [sp, #S_LR]
> + mrs x0, nzcv
> + str x0, [sp, #S_PSTATE]
I'm slightly wary of this, as it means user_mode(regs) will return true
for the pt_regs passed into the handler. Do we need to force the mode?
What about things like the I bit?
Similarly, why don't you save the stack pointer?
> +
> + mov x0, sp
> + bl trampoline_probe_handler
> + /* Replace trampoline address in lr with actual
> + orig_ret_addr return address. */
> + str x0, [sp, #S_LR]
Why can't the trampoline_probe_handler update the pt_regs directly?
Will
--
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