Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] uprobes, x86: Fix _TIF_UPROBE vs _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME

2014-11-13 Thread Srikar Dronamraju
* Andy Lutomirski [2014-11-13 23:01:12]: > On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:08 PM, Srikar Dronamraju > wrote: > > * Andy Lutomirski [2014-11-13 14:31:21]: > > > >> x86 call do_notify_resume on paranoid returns if TIF_UPROBE is set > >> but not on non-paranoid returns. I suspect that this is a mistak

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] uprobes, x86: Fix _TIF_UPROBE vs _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME

2014-11-13 Thread Andy Lutomirski
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:08 PM, Srikar Dronamraju wrote: > * Andy Lutomirski [2014-11-13 14:31:21]: > >> x86 call do_notify_resume on paranoid returns if TIF_UPROBE is set >> but not on non-paranoid returns. I suspect that this is a mistake >> and that the code only works because int3 is paran

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] uprobes, x86: Fix _TIF_UPROBE vs _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME

2014-11-13 Thread Srikar Dronamraju
* Andy Lutomirski [2014-11-13 14:31:21]: > x86 call do_notify_resume on paranoid returns if TIF_UPROBE is set > but not on non-paranoid returns. I suspect that this is a mistake > and that the code only works because int3 is paranoid. > > Setting _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME in the uprobe code was probab

[PATCH v2 2/2] uprobes, x86: Fix _TIF_UPROBE vs _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME

2014-11-13 Thread Andy Lutomirski
x86 call do_notify_resume on paranoid returns if TIF_UPROBE is set but not on non-paranoid returns. I suspect that this is a mistake and that the code only works because int3 is paranoid. Setting _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME in the uprobe code was probably a workaround for the x86 bug. With that bug fixed