[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YD35jaqebjDoyeb6@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2021 09:38:37 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Anil S Keshavamurthy <anil.s.keshavamurthy@...el.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] x86/kprobes: Use int3 instead of debug trap for
single-step
On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 11:08:15PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> + default:
> + if ((opcode & 0xf0) == 0x70) {
> + /* 1 byte conditional jump */
> + p->ainsn.emulate_op = kprobe_emulate_jcc;
> + p->ainsn.jcc.type = opcode & 0xf;
> + p->ainsn.rel32 = *(char *)insn->immediate.bytes;
> + }
> }
Would it make sense to write that as:
case 0x70 ... 0x7f:
/* 1 byte conditional jump */
p->ainsn.emulate_op = kprobe_emulate_jcc;
p->ainsn.jcc.type = opcode & 0xf;
p->ainsn.rel32 = *(char *)insn->immediate.bytes;
break;
instead? Preferably right before the 0x0f case :-)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists