From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
To: "Lynch, Rusty" <rusty.lynch@intel.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>,
akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Vara Prasad <prasadav@us.ibm.com>, Hien Nguyen <hien@us.ibm.com>,
Prasanna S Panchamukhi <prasanna@in.ibm.com>,
Jim Keniston <jkenisto@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [patch] x86_64 specific function return probes
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2005 18:45:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050603164551.GS23831@wotan.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <032EB457B9DBC540BFB1B7B519C78B0E07499DE4@orsmsx404.amr.corp.intel.com>
On Fri, Jun 03, 2005 at 09:40:26AM -0700, Lynch, Rusty wrote:
> From: Andi Kleen [mailto:ak@suse.de]
> >On Thu, Jun 02, 2005 at 01:58:50PM -0700, Rusty Lynch wrote:
> >> The following patch adds the x86_64 architecture specific
> implementation
> >
> >[....]
> >
> >Thanks for the long description.
> >
> >but...
> >
> >> +struct task_struct *arch_get_kprobe_task(void *ptr)
> >> +{
> >> + return ((struct thread_info *) (((unsigned long) ptr) &
> >> + (~(THREAD_SIZE -1))))->task;
> >> +}
> >
> >and
> >
> >
> >> + tsk = arch_get_kprobe_task(sara);
> >
> >
> >This is still wrong when the code is not executing on the process
> >stack, but on a interrupt/Exception stack. Any reason you cannot
> >just use current here?
> >
> >-Andi
>
> Ah... you are talking about if someone registers a return probe on
> something like an interrupt handler, right?
Yes.
>
> I was under the impression that I could not always count on the current
> I get from interrupt context to map to the current seen by the target
> function (that triggers the breakpoint.) It sounds like an invalid
> assumption lead to some extra complexity that isn't correct for all
> cases.
It is an invalid assumption, current works in all contexts. Except
if your GS is broken, but that should only happen when the kernel
is already very crashed.
-Andi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-06-03 16:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-06-03 16:40 [patch] x86_64 specific function return probes Lynch, Rusty
2005-06-03 16:45 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-06-03 16:54 Lynch, Rusty
2005-06-03 16:05 Lynch, Rusty
2005-06-02 20:58 Rusty Lynch
2005-06-03 15:45 ` Andi Kleen
2005-06-02 17:35 Lynch, Rusty
2005-06-03 5:07 ` Andrew Morton
2005-06-02 16:09 Rusty Lynch
2005-06-02 17:31 ` Andi Kleen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20050603164551.GS23831@wotan.suse.de \
--to=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=hien@us.ibm.com \
--cc=jkenisto@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=prasadav@us.ibm.com \
--cc=prasanna@in.ibm.com \
--cc=rusty.lynch@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.