On Wed, 05 Jun 2019 15:08:01 +0200
Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]> wrote:
> -void text_poke_bp(void *addr, const void *opcode, size_t len, void *handler)
> +void text_poke_bp(void *addr, const void *opcode, size_t len, const void
> *emulate)
> {
> unsigned char int3 = 0xcc;
>
> - bp_int3_handler = handler;
> + bp_int3_opcode = emulate ?: opcode;
> bp_int3_addr = (u8 *)addr + sizeof(int3);
> bp_patching_in_progress = true;
>
> lockdep_assert_held(&text_mutex);
>
> /*
> + * poke_int3_handler() relies on @opcode being a 5 byte instruction;
> + * notably a JMP, CALL or NOP5_ATOMIC.
> + */
> + BUG_ON(len != 5);
If we have a bug on here, why bother with passing in len at all? Just
force it to be 5.
We could make it a WARN_ON() and return without doing anything.
This also prevents us from ever changing two byte jmps.
-- Steve
> +
> + /*
> * Corresponding read barrier in int3 notifier for making sure the
> - * in_progress and handler are correctly ordered wrt. patching.
> + * in_progress and opcode are correctly ordered wrt. patching.
> */
> smp_wmb();
>
> -
