[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170601142858.na6iph4ihpgcgold@treble>
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2017 09:28:58 -0500
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc: X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
live-patching@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 06/10] x86/entry: add CFI hint undwarf annotations
On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 09:23:58AM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 07:03:18AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 10:44 PM, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> wrote:
> > Just to make sure I understand this, if we unwind from...
> >
> > > @@ -112,6 +114,7 @@ For 32-bit we have the following conventions - kernel is built with
> > > movq %rdx, 12*8+\offset(%rsp)
> > > movq %rsi, 13*8+\offset(%rsp)
> >
> > ...here..., will objtool think that rdx and rsi (etc) still live in
> > their respective regs, or will it find them in the on-stack data given
> > by CFI_REGS? If the former, how does undwarf deal with the
> > corresponding pops?
>
> It will find them in their respective registers, which is fine because
> they haven't been clobbered yet.
Sorry, I hit send too soon. Which pops are you referring to?
--
Josh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists