[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250409114950.GB32748@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2025 13:49:51 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org, Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>,
Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] uprobes/x86: Add support to emulate nop5 instruction
On 04/09, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> For the moment, lets forget about compat tasks on a 64-bit kernel, can't
> we simply do something like below?
...
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/uprobes.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/uprobes.c
> @@ -840,12 +840,16 @@ static int branch_setup_xol_ops(struct arch_uprobe *auprobe, struct insn *insn)
> insn_byte_t p;
> int i;
>
> + /* prefix* + nop[i]; same as jmp with .offs = 0 */
> + for (i = 1; i <= ASM_NOP_MAX; ++i) {
> + if (!memcmp(insn->kaddr, x86_nops[i], i))
> + goto setup;
> + }
> +
> switch (opc1) {
> case 0xeb: /* jmp 8 */
> case 0xe9: /* jmp 32 */
> break;
> - case 0x90: /* prefix* + nop; same as jmp with .offs = 0 */
> - goto setup;
OK, I guess we can't remove this "case 0x90" because of prefixes, please
ignore this part.
Oleg.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists