[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190213071711.GB121801@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2019 08:17:11 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, peterz@...radead.org,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrea Righi <righi.andrea@...il.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip v3 05/10] kprobes: Search non-suffixed symbol in
blacklist
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> * Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> > Newer gcc can generate some different instances of a function
> > with suffixed symbols if the function is optimized and only
> > has a part of that. (e.g. .constprop, .part etc.)
> >
> > In this case, it is not enough to check the entry of kprobe
> > blacklist because it only records non-suffixed symbol address.
> >
> > To fix this issue, search non-suffixed symbol in blacklist if
> > given address is within a symbol which has a suffix.
> >
> > Note that this can cause false positive cases if a kprobe-safe
> > function is optimized to suffixed instance and has same name
> > symbol which is blacklisted.
> > But I would like to chose a fail-safe design for this issue.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
>
> Why did you not add Steven's Reviewed-by tag?
The series looks fine otherwise, so I applied it with Steve's reviewed-by
tag added.
Thanks,
Ingo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists