[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <878qeyedaw.fsf@igel.home>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2025 15:50:15 +0100
From: Andreas Schwab <schwab@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Menglong Dong <menglong8.dong@...il.com>
Cc: Menglong Dong <menglong.dong@...ux.dev>, ast@...nel.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org, daniel@...earbox.net, john.fastabend@...il.com,
andrii@...nel.org, martin.lau@...ux.dev, eddyz87@...il.com,
song@...nel.org, yonghong.song@...ux.dev, kpsingh@...nel.org,
sdf@...ichev.me, haoluo@...gle.com, jolsa@...nel.org,
mhiramat@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, jiang.biao@...ux.dev,
bpf@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 3/6] bpf: fix the usage of
BPF_TRAMP_F_SKIP_FRAME
On Dez 19 2025, Menglong Dong wrote:
> @@ -1171,6 +1167,8 @@ static int __arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(struct
> bpf_tramp_image *im,
> }
>
> if (flags & BPF_TRAMP_F_CALL_ORIG) {
> + /* skip to actual body of traced function */
> + orig_call += RV_FENTRY_NINSNS * 4;
Before this line, orig_call still contains the same value as func_addr,
with the latter being dead, so there is not much point in using a copy.
--
Andreas Schwab, schwab@...ux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 7578 EB47 D4E5 4D69 2510 2552 DF73 E780 A9DA AEC1
"And now for something completely different."
Powered by blists - more mailing lists