On Mon, 2017-05-29 at 10:50 +0200, Christophe LEROY wrote: > > Le 25/05/2017 à 05:36, Balbir Singh a écrit : > > arch_arm/disarm_probe use direct assignment for copying > > instructions, replace them with patch_instruction > > > > Signed-off-by: Balbir Singh <bsinghar...@gmail.com> > > --- > > arch/powerpc/kernel/kprobes.c | 4 ++-- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/kprobes.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/kprobes.c > > index 160ae0f..5e1fa86 100644 > > --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/kprobes.c > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/kprobes.c > > @@ -158,7 +158,7 @@ NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(arch_prepare_kprobe); > > > > void arch_arm_kprobe(struct kprobe *p) > > { > > - *p->addr = BREAKPOINT_INSTRUCTION; > > + patch_instruction(p->addr, BREAKPOINT_INSTRUCTION); > > flush_icache_range((unsigned long) p->addr, > > (unsigned long) p->addr + sizeof(kprobe_opcode_t)); > > } > > @@ -166,7 +166,7 @@ NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(arch_arm_kprobe); > > > > void arch_disarm_kprobe(struct kprobe *p) > > { > > - *p->addr = p->opcode; > > + patch_instruction(p->addr, BREAKPOINT_INSTRUCTION); > > Shouldn't it be the following instead ? > > patch_instruction(p->addr, p->opcode);
Yes, thanks for catching this! I'll do a v2 on top of what you posted. Balbir Singh