linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv2 1/8] ftrace: add ftrace_init

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]

Message-ID: <77ba9a77-7971-77b6-c3f9-e3e0adf6cf54@arm.com>
Date:   Thu, 7 Nov 2019 10:10:52 +0530
From:   Amit Kachhap <amit.kachhap@....com>
To:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, catalin.marinas@....com,
        deller@....de, duwe@...e.de, James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com,
        james.morse@....com, jeyu@...nel.org, jpoimboe@...hat.com,
        jthierry@...hat.com, linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org,
        mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, svens@...ckframe.org,
        takahiro.akashi@...aro.org, will@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/8] ftrace: add ftrace_init_nop()



On 11/6/19 7:45 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 12:17:26PM +0530, Amit Kachhap wrote:
>> On 11/4/19 7:06 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
>>> On Sat, Nov 02, 2019 at 05:49:00PM +0530, Amit Daniel Kachhap wrote:
>>>> On 10/29/19 10:28 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
>>>>> +/**
>>>>> + * ftrace_init_nop - initialize a nop call site
>>>>> + * @mod: module structure if called by module load initialization
>>>>> + * @rec: the call site record (e.g. mcount/fentry)
>>>>> + *
>>>>> + * This is a very sensitive operation and great care needs
>>>>> + * to be taken by the arch.  The operation should carefully
>>>>> + * read the location, check to see if what is read is indeed
>>>>> + * what we expect it to be, and then on success of the compare,
>>>>> + * it should write to the location.
>>>>> + *
>>>>> + * The code segment at @rec->ip should contain the contents created by
>>>>> + * the compiler
>>>> Nit: Will it be better to write it as "@rec->ip should store the adjusted
>>>> ftrace entry address of the call site" or something like that.
>>>
>>> This was the specific wording requested by Steve, and it's trying to
>>> describe the instructions at rec->ip, rather than the value of rec->ip,
>>> so I think it's better to leave this as-is.
>> ok Its fine this way too. Actually from the comment, I could not understand
>> which one of the compiler contents this points to as in this case there are
>> 2 nops.
> 
> We can't say what the compiler contents will be. An architecture may use
> this callback if it's using mcount, mfentry, patchable-function-entry,
> or some other mechanism we're not aware of today. Depending on the
> architecture and mechanism, the callsite could contain a number of
> distinct things.
> 
> All the comment is trying to say is that when ftrace_init_nop() is
> called, the callsite has not been modified in any way since being
> compiled, so we can expect the contents to be whatever the compiler
> generated.

ok. Your details seems reasonable.

Thanks,
Amit Daniel
> 
> Thanks,
> Mark.
>