Firstly, let me remind that my understanding of low lovel hardware details is very limited.
On 05/06, Denys Vlasenko wrote: > > Oleg, can you clear for me the following - > > If the probed instruction triggers an "illegal insn" or "privileged insn" > CPU exception - are we completely fine? Yes I think we are fine. I assume that, say, do_debug() won't be called in this case, and do_invalid_op()->do_trap() should trigger arch_uprobe_xol_was_trapped() logic. Well, actually we are not 100% fine because si_addr can be wrong. But this is not invalid_op-specific, we need to fix this anyway and the fix is simple. I do not want to discuss this now, but I am going to make another series later which adds something like uprobe_instruction_pointer(regs). It can (should) be used by DO_ERROR_INFO() (perhaps by something else, not sure about math_error()) _and_ by show_unhandled_signals users (actually the main reason to me). The only problem is that this code should be cleanuped first. In fact I was thinking about this change from the very beginning of the recent fixes, the "wrong" ip reported by do_general_protection() greatly complicated the investigation of that problem. But I need to take a rest of uprobes ;) Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
