linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 2/7] perf annotate: Add cross arch annotate support

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-Id: <57B6E1F7.30005@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:   Fri, 19 Aug 2016 16:09:51 +0530
From:   Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        acme@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com,
        alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, treeze.taeung@...il.com,
        naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, markus@...ppelsdorf.de,
        chris.ryder@....com, pawel.moll@....com, mhiramat@...nel.org,
        jolsa@...nel.org, mpe@...erman.id.au, hemant@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
        namhyung@...nel.org,
        Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/7] perf annotate: Add cross arch annotate support

Thanks Russell for reviewing.

On Friday 19 August 2016 01:20 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 10:59:01AM +0530, Ravi Bangoria wrote:
>> -static struct ins instructions[] = {
>> +static struct ins instructions_x86[] = {
>>  	{ .name = "add",   .ops  = &mov_ops, },
>>  	{ .name = "addl",  .ops  = &mov_ops, },
>>  	{ .name = "addq",  .ops  = &mov_ops, },
>>  	{ .name = "addw",  .ops  = &mov_ops, },
>>  	{ .name = "and",   .ops  = &mov_ops, },
>> -#ifdef __arm__
>> -	{ .name = "b",     .ops  = &jump_ops, }, // might also be a call
>> -	{ .name = "bcc",   .ops  = &jump_ops, },
>> -	{ .name = "bcs",   .ops  = &jump_ops, },
>> -	{ .name = "beq",   .ops  = &jump_ops, },
>> -	{ .name = "bge",   .ops  = &jump_ops, },
>> -	{ .name = "bgt",   .ops  = &jump_ops, },
>> -	{ .name = "bhi",   .ops  = &jump_ops, },
>> -	{ .name = "bl",    .ops  = &call_ops, },
>> -	{ .name = "bls",   .ops  = &jump_ops, },
>> -	{ .name = "blt",   .ops  = &jump_ops, },
>> -	{ .name = "blx",   .ops  = &call_ops, },
>> -	{ .name = "bne",   .ops  = &jump_ops, },
>> -#endif
> Notice that ARM includes a lot of other instructions from this table,
> not just those above.
>
>>  	{ .name = "bts",   .ops  = &mov_ops, },
>>  	{ .name = "call",  .ops  = &call_ops, },
>>  	{ .name = "callq", .ops  = &call_ops, },
>> @@ -456,6 +444,21 @@ static struct ins instructions[] = {
>>  	{ .name = "retq",  .ops  = &ret_ops, },
>>  };
>>  
>> +static struct ins instructions_arm[] = {
>> +	{ .name = "b",     .ops  = &jump_ops, }, /* might also be a call */
>> +	{ .name = "bcc",   .ops  = &jump_ops, },
>> +	{ .name = "bcs",   .ops  = &jump_ops, },
>> +	{ .name = "beq",   .ops  = &jump_ops, },
>> +	{ .name = "bge",   .ops  = &jump_ops, },
>> +	{ .name = "bgt",   .ops  = &jump_ops, },
>> +	{ .name = "bhi",   .ops  = &jump_ops, },
>> +	{ .name = "bl",    .ops  = &call_ops, },
>> +	{ .name = "bls",   .ops  = &jump_ops, },
>> +	{ .name = "blt",   .ops  = &jump_ops, },
>> +	{ .name = "blx",   .ops  = &call_ops, },
>> +	{ .name = "bne",   .ops  = &jump_ops, },
>> +};
>> +
> ...
>> +	if (!strcmp(norm_arch, NORM_X86)) {
>> +		instructions = instructions_x86;
>> +		nmemb = ARRAY_SIZE(instructions_x86);
>> +	} else if (!strcmp(norm_arch, NORM_ARM)) {
>> +		instructions = instructions_arm;
>> +		nmemb = ARRAY_SIZE(instructions_arm);
> But these changes result in _only_ the ones that were in the #if __arm__
> being matched.  This is wrong.
>
> If we want to go that way, we need to add _all_ arm instructions to
> instructions_arm, not just those within the #if.

Yes, I've mentioned same in cover letter as well.

Can I add all x86 instructions for arm as well? If not, can you please provide
a list of arm instructions that needs to be added here.

-Ravi