linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] LoongArch: uprobes: make UPROBE_SWBP_INSN/UPROBE_XOLBP

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2024 20:48:02 +0800
From: Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@...ngson.cn>
To: oleg@...hat.com
Cc: andrii.nakryiko@...il.com, andrii@...nel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
 chenhuacai@...nel.org, jolsa@...nel.org, kernel@...0n.name,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 loongarch@...ts.linux.dev, mhiramat@...nel.org, nathan@...nel.org,
 rostedt@...dmis.org, yangtiezhu@...ngson.cn
Subject: Re: [PATCH] LoongArch: uprobes: make
 UPROBE_SWBP_INSN/UPROBE_XOLBP_INSN constant

On Thu, 27 Jun 2024 19:38:06 +0200
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:

...

 > > > +arch_initcall(check_emit_break);
 > > > +
 > >
 > > I wouldn't even bother with this, but whatever.
 >
 > Agreed, this looks a bit ugly. I did this only because I can not test
 > this (hopefully trivial) patch and the maintainers didn't reply.

The LoongArch maintainer Huacai told me offline to reply this thread today.

 > If LoongArch boots at least once with this change, this run-time check
 > can be removed.

I will test it next Monday.

 > And just in case... I didn't dare to make a more "generic" change, but
 > perhaps KPROBE_BP_INSN and KPROBE_SSTEPBP_INSN should be redefined the
 > same way for micro-optimization. In this case __emit_break() should be
 > probably moved into arch/loongarch/include/asm/inst.h.

Yeah. I think so too.

Thanks,
Tiezhu