[RFC 8/8] ARM64: Add uprobe support
Pratyush Anand
panand at redhat.com
Sun Jan 11 22:45:34 PST 2015
Hi Oleg,
How can I generate a scenario to test:
a) arch_uprobe_xol_was_trapped
b) arch_uprobe_abort_xol
~Pratyush
On Monday 12 January 2015 10:34 AM, Pratyush Anand wrote:
>
>
> On Friday 09 January 2015 11:29 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>> On 12/31, Pratyush Anand wrote:
>>>
>>> +int arch_uprobe_analyze_insn(struct arch_uprobe *auprobe, struct
>>> mm_struct *mm,
>>> + unsigned long addr)
>>> +{
>>> + probe_opcode_t insn;
>>> +
>>> + insn = *(probe_opcode_t *)(&auprobe->insn[0]);
>>> +
>>> + switch (arm_probe_decode_insn(insn, &auprobe->ainsn)) {
>>> + case INSN_REJECTED:
>>> + return -EINVAL;
>>> +
>>> + case INSN_GOOD_NO_SLOT:
>>> + auprobe->simulate = true;
>>> + if (auprobe->ainsn.prepare)
>>> + auprobe->ainsn.prepare(insn, &auprobe->ainsn);
>>> + break;
>>> +
>>> + case INSN_GOOD:
>>> + default:
>>> + break;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + return 0;
>>> +}
>>
>> forgot to mention... shouldn't it also check IS_ALIGNED(addr,
>> AARCH64_INSN_SIZE) ?
>>
>> I do not know if unaligned insn address is valid on arm64 or not, but
>> please
>
> AARCH64 instructions are always of fixed lenght ie 4 bytes. I do not see
> possibility of addr being unaligned. Please let me know, if I am missing
> something.
>
>> note that at least it should not cross the page boundary, set_swbp()
>> needs to
>> write AARCH64_INSN_SIZE == UPROBE_SWBP_INSN bytes and it assumes that
>> this
>> should fit the single page.
>
> So, again I do not see the possibility of crossing of page boundary for
> any instruction address.
>
> ~Pratyush
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list