On Sat, Dec 08, 2018 at 12:48:59PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > On Fri, 7 Dec 2018 18:58:05 +0100 > Andrea Righi <righi.and...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Sat, Dec 08, 2018 at 01:01:20AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > > Hi Andrea and Ingo, > > > > > > Here is the patch what I meant. I just ran it on qemu-x86, and seemed > > > working. > > > After introducing this patch, I will start adding > > > arch_populate_kprobe_blacklist() > > > to some arches. > > > > > > Thank you, > > > > > > [RFC] kprobes: x86/kprobes: Blacklist symbols in arch-defined prohibited > > > area > > > > > > From: Masami Hiramatsu <mhira...@kernel.org> > > > > > > Blacklist symbols in arch-defined probe-prohibited areas. > > > With this change, user can see all symbols which are prohibited > > > to probe in debugfs. > > > > > > All archtectures which have custom prohibit areas should define > > > its own arch_populate_kprobe_blacklist() function, but unless that, > > > all symbols marked __kprobes are blacklisted. > > > > What about iterating all symbols and use arch_within_kprobe_blacklist() > > to check if we need to blacklist them or not. > > Sorry, I don't want to iterate all ksyms since it may take a long time > (especially embedded small devices.) > > > > > In this way we don't have to introduce an > > arch_populate_kprobe_blacklist() for each architecture. > > Hmm, I had a same idea, but there are some arch which prohibit probing > extable entries (e.g. arm64.) For correctness of the blacklist, I think > it should be listed (not entire the function body). > I also rather like to remove arch_within_kprobe_blacklist() instead.
OK. Thanks. -Andrea
