[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20210104124558.7c89fb6fa305507c098f0d85@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2021 12:45:58 +0900
From: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Naveen N . Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.ibm.com>,
Anil S Keshavamurthy <anil.s.keshavamurthy@...el.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip v2] x86/kprobes: Do not decode opcode in
resume_execution()
On Thu, 31 Dec 2020 17:09:23 +0100
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 11:12:05PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > @@ -467,8 +489,8 @@ static int arch_copy_kprobe(struct kprobe *p)
> > */
> > len = prepare_boost(buf, p, &insn);
> >
> > - /* Check whether the instruction modifies Interrupt Flag or not */
> > - p->ainsn.if_modifier = is_IF_modifier(buf);
> > + /* Analyze the opcode and set resume flags */
> > + set_resume_flags(p, &insn);
>
> So this function wants to be called something like analyze_insn() or so
> then? set_resume_flags() is kinda misleading as a name.
Hrm, I meant setting the flags used in the resume_execution() afterwards.
Since the instruction itself (not only opcode but also oprands) was
also analyzed in other places, so I like the set_resume_flags() for it.
Thank you,
--
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists