David, sorry for delay. On 10/19, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > On 10/15, David Long wrote: > > > > @@ -1732,9 +1732,6 @@ static void handle_swbp(struct pt_regs *regs) > > return; > > } > > > > - /* change it in advance for ->handler() and restart */ > > - instruction_pointer_set(regs, bp_vaddr); > > - > > Well, this looks obviously wrong. This SET_IP() has the comment ;) > > Note also that with this breaks __skip_sstep() on x86.
Hmm. Thinking more, it seems that this patch has another problem. IIUC, the whole point of arch_uprobe_ignore() is to avoid handler_chain() if the condition was not satisfied, so you need to call it before handler_chain() ? Otherwise this logic should go into can_skip_sstep() and we simply do not need the new hook, just we need to tweak the (ugly) UPROBE_SKIP_SSTEP logic. Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
