[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wjvt75XFUWxPQQJZE0Wdi8HtSLtqQm2L-ZrqH7=2g3ByQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2024 11:45:13 +0000
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Jiaxun Yang <jiaxun.yang@...goat.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Xi Ruoyao <xry111@...111.site>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] Handle delay slot for extable lookup
On Sun, 4 Feb 2024 at 11:03, Jiaxun Yang <jiaxun.yang@...goat.com> wrote:
>
> Well this is the tricky part of my assumption.
> In `exception_epc()` `__isa_exception_epc()` stuff is only called if we
> are in delay slot.
> It is impossible for a invalid instruction_pointer to be considered as
> "in delay slot" by hardware.
Ok, I guess I'm convinced this is all safe. Not great, and not exactly
giving me the warm fuzzies, but not buggy.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists