[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230815204112.1f7ab2bf@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2023 20:41:12 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: jpoimboe@...nel.org, x86@...nel.org, baron@...mai.com,
ardb@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, hpa@...or.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, christian@...cart.de,
song@...nel.org, mcgrof@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/static_call: Fix __static_call_fixup()
On Wed, 16 Aug 2023 01:08:09 +0200
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/static_call.c b/arch/x86/kernel/static_call.c
> index b70670a98597..2e67512d7104 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/static_call.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/static_call.c
> @@ -186,6 +186,16 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(arch_static_call_transform);
> */
> bool __static_call_fixup(void *tramp, u8 op, void *dest)
> {
> + /*
> + * Not all .return_sites are a static_call trampoline (most are not).
> + * Check if the next 3 bytes are still kernel text, if not, then this
> + * definitely is not a trampoline and we need not worry further.
> + *
> + * This avoids the memcmp() below tripping over pagefaults etc..
> + */
> + if (!kernel_text_address(tramp+7))
The comment says "next 3 bytes" and the test is "tramp+7". Why the magic 7 number?
If the tramp is 5 bytes, shouldn't it be +8?
-- Steve
> + return false;
> +
> if (memcmp(tramp+5, tramp_ud, 3)) {
> /* Not a trampoline site, not our problem. */
> return false;
Powered by blists - more mailing lists