[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.21.2103101258070.18547@pobox.suse.cz>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 15:21:01 +0100 (CET)
From: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
Daniel Xu <dxu@...uu.xyz>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
bpf@...r.kernel.org, kuba@...nel.org, mingo@...hat.com,
ast@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, kernel-team@...com, yhs@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip 3/5] kprobes: treewide: Remove trampoline_address
from kretprobe_trampoline_handler()
Hi Masami,
> --- a/include/linux/kprobes.h
> +++ b/include/linux/kprobes.h
> @@ -205,15 +205,23 @@ extern void arch_prepare_kretprobe(struct kretprobe_instance *ri,
> struct pt_regs *regs);
> extern int arch_trampoline_kprobe(struct kprobe *p);
>
> +void kretprobe_trampoline(void);
> +/*
> + * Since some architecture uses structured function pointer,
> + * use arch_deref_entry_point() to get real function address.
s/arch_deref_entry_point/dereference_function_descriptor/ ?
> + */
> +static nokprobe_inline void *kretprobe_trampoline_addr(void)
> +{
> + return dereference_function_descriptor(kretprobe_trampoline);
> +}
> +
Would it make sense to use this in s390 and powerpc reliable unwinders?
Both
arch/s390/kernel/stacktrace.c:arch_stack_walk_reliable()
arch/powerpc/kernel/stacktrace.c:__save_stack_trace_tsk_reliable()
have
if (state.ip == (unsigned long)kretprobe_trampoline)
return -EINVAL;
which you wanted to hide previously if I am not mistaken.
Miroslav
Powered by blists - more mailing lists