[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20211103081935.GA174703@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2021 09:19:35 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Alexander Popov <alex.popov@...ux.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: Stackleak vs noinstr (Was: [GIT pull] objtool/core for v5.16-rc1)
On Wed, Nov 03, 2021 at 10:18:22AM +0300, Alexander Popov wrote:
> Yes, this is a correct approach.
>
> But I'm not sure about removing NOKPROBE_SYMBOL and notrace for
> stackleak_erase. Does the code in noinstr.text disable all those?
Yes, noinstr implies all those and more. Both kprobe and tracing are a
form of instrumentation, and hence noinstr must disallow it.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists