From: dave.long@linaro.org (David Long)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v12 01/10] arm64: Add HAVE_REGS_AND_STACK_ACCESS_API feature
Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 00:18:03 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <573E8FFB.3000107@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160517091446.GB5082@sha-win-210.asiapac.arm.com>
On 05/17/2016 05:14 AM, Huang Shijie wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 02:52:56PM -0400, David Long wrote:
>> From: "David A. Long" <dave.long@linaro.org>
>> +/**
>> + * regs_within_kernel_stack() - check the address in the stack
>> + * @regs: pt_regs which contains kernel stack pointer.
>> + * @addr: address which is checked.
>> + *
>> + * regs_within_kernel_stack() checks @addr is within the kernel stack page(s).
>> + * If @addr is within the kernel stack, it returns true. If not, returns false.
>> + */
>> +bool regs_within_kernel_stack(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long addr)
>> +{
>> + return ((addr & ~(THREAD_SIZE - 1)) ==
>> + (kernel_stack_pointer(regs) & ~(THREAD_SIZE - 1))) ||
>> + on_irq_stack(addr, raw_smp_processor_id());
>> +}
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * regs_get_kernel_stack_nth() - get Nth entry of the stack
>> + * @regs: pt_regs which contains kernel stack pointer.
>> + * @n: stack entry number.
>> + *
>> + * regs_get_kernel_stack_nth() returns @n th entry of the kernel stack which
>> + * is specified by @regs. If the @n th entry is NOT in the kernel stack,
>> + * this returns 0.
>> + */_
>> +unsigned long regs_get_kernel_stack_nth(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned int n)
>> +{
>> + unsigned long *addr = (unsigned long *)kernel_stack_pointer(regs);
>> +
>> + addr += n;
>> + if (regs_within_kernel_stack(regs, (unsigned long)addr))
> If the @addr fall in the interrupt stack, the regs_within_kernel_stack()
> will return true. But Is it what we want?
>
Yes, I think it is. The function is used in regs_get_kernel_stack_nth()
to make sure the data being asked for (based on the pt_regs saved stack
pointer) is actually on the stack, whether it's "kernel" stack or "irq"
stack.
Thanks,
-dl
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: David Long <dave.long@linaro.org>
To: Huang Shijie <shijie.huang@arm.com>
Cc: "Catalin Marinas" <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
"Will Deacon" <will.deacon@arm.com>,
"Sandeepa Prabhu" <sandeepa.s.prabhu@gmail.com>,
"William Cohen" <wcohen@redhat.com>,
"Pratyush Anand" <panand@redhat.com>,
"Steve Capper" <steve.capper@linaro.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Marc Zyngier" <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
"Mark Rutland" <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
"Petr Mladek" <pmladek@suse.com>,
"Viresh Kumar" <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
"John Blackwood" <john.blackwood@ccur.com>,
"Feng Kan" <fkan@apm.com>, "Zi Shen Lim" <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>,
"Dave P Martin" <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
"Yang Shi" <yang.shi@linaro.org>,
"Vladimir Murzin" <Vladimir.Murzin@arm.com>,
"Kees Cook" <keescook@chromium.org>,
"Suzuki K. Poulose" <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
"Mark Brown" <broonie@kernel.org>,
"Alex Bennée" <alex.bennee@linaro.org>,
"Ard Biesheuvel" <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
"Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Mark Salyzyn" <salyzyn@android.com>,
"James Morse" <james.morse@arm.com>,
"Christoffer Dall" <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Robin Murphy" <Robin.Murphy@arm.com>,
"Jens Wiklander" <jens.wiklander@linaro.org>,
"Balamurugan Shanmugam" <bshanmugam@apm.com>,
nd@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 01/10] arm64: Add HAVE_REGS_AND_STACK_ACCESS_API feature
Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 00:18:03 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <573E8FFB.3000107@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160517091446.GB5082@sha-win-210.asiapac.arm.com>
On 05/17/2016 05:14 AM, Huang Shijie wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 02:52:56PM -0400, David Long wrote:
>> From: "David A. Long" <dave.long@linaro.org>
>> +/**
>> + * regs_within_kernel_stack() - check the address in the stack
>> + * @regs: pt_regs which contains kernel stack pointer.
>> + * @addr: address which is checked.
>> + *
>> + * regs_within_kernel_stack() checks @addr is within the kernel stack page(s).
>> + * If @addr is within the kernel stack, it returns true. If not, returns false.
>> + */
>> +bool regs_within_kernel_stack(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long addr)
>> +{
>> + return ((addr & ~(THREAD_SIZE - 1)) ==
>> + (kernel_stack_pointer(regs) & ~(THREAD_SIZE - 1))) ||
>> + on_irq_stack(addr, raw_smp_processor_id());
>> +}
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * regs_get_kernel_stack_nth() - get Nth entry of the stack
>> + * @regs: pt_regs which contains kernel stack pointer.
>> + * @n: stack entry number.
>> + *
>> + * regs_get_kernel_stack_nth() returns @n th entry of the kernel stack which
>> + * is specified by @regs. If the @n th entry is NOT in the kernel stack,
>> + * this returns 0.
>> + */_
>> +unsigned long regs_get_kernel_stack_nth(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned int n)
>> +{
>> + unsigned long *addr = (unsigned long *)kernel_stack_pointer(regs);
>> +
>> + addr += n;
>> + if (regs_within_kernel_stack(regs, (unsigned long)addr))
> If the @addr fall in the interrupt stack, the regs_within_kernel_stack()
> will return true. But Is it what we want?
>
Yes, I think it is. The function is used in regs_get_kernel_stack_nth()
to make sure the data being asked for (based on the pt_regs saved stack
pointer) is actually on the stack, whether it's "kernel" stack or "irq"
stack.
Thanks,
-dl
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-05-20 4:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 72+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-27 18:52 [PATCH v12 00/10] arm64: Add kernel probes (kprobes) support David Long
2016-04-27 18:52 ` David Long
2016-04-27 18:52 ` [PATCH v12 01/10] arm64: Add HAVE_REGS_AND_STACK_ACCESS_API feature David Long
2016-04-27 18:52 ` David Long
2016-04-28 16:08 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-04-28 16:08 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-05-13 19:07 ` David Long
2016-05-13 19:07 ` David Long
2016-05-17 9:14 ` Huang Shijie
2016-05-17 9:14 ` Huang Shijie
2016-05-20 4:18 ` David Long [this message]
2016-05-20 4:18 ` David Long
2016-04-27 18:52 ` [PATCH v12 02/10] arm64: Add more test functions to insn.c David Long
2016-04-27 18:52 ` David Long
2016-04-27 18:52 ` [PATCH v12 03/10] arm64: add conditional instruction simulation support David Long
2016-04-27 18:52 ` David Long
2016-04-27 18:52 ` [PATCH v12 04/10] arm64: Blacklist non-kprobe-able symbols David Long
2016-04-27 18:52 ` David Long
2016-04-27 18:53 ` [PATCH v12 05/10] arm64: Kprobes with single stepping support David Long
2016-04-27 18:53 ` David Long
2016-05-12 15:01 ` James Morse
2016-05-12 15:01 ` James Morse
2016-05-18 4:04 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2016-05-18 4:04 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2016-05-20 5:16 ` David Long
2016-05-20 5:16 ` David Long
2016-05-17 8:58 ` Huang Shijie
2016-05-17 8:58 ` Huang Shijie
2016-05-18 3:29 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2016-05-18 3:29 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2016-05-26 19:25 ` David Long
2016-05-26 19:25 ` David Long
2016-05-26 15:40 ` David Long
2016-05-26 15:40 ` David Long
2016-05-17 9:10 ` Huang Shijie
2016-05-17 9:10 ` Huang Shijie
2016-06-01 5:15 ` David Long
2016-06-01 5:15 ` David Long
2016-04-27 18:53 ` [PATCH v12 06/10] arm64: Treat all entry code as non-kprobe-able David Long
2016-04-27 18:53 ` David Long
2016-05-12 14:49 ` James Morse
2016-05-12 14:49 ` James Morse
2016-05-20 5:28 ` David Long
2016-05-20 5:28 ` David Long
2016-05-26 15:26 ` David Long
2016-05-26 15:26 ` David Long
2016-04-27 18:53 ` [PATCH v12 07/10] arm64: kprobes instruction simulation support David Long
2016-04-27 18:53 ` David Long
2016-05-19 1:52 ` Huang Shijie
2016-05-19 1:52 ` Huang Shijie
2016-05-26 19:28 ` David Long
2016-05-26 19:28 ` David Long
2016-04-27 18:53 ` [PATCH v12 08/10] arm64: Add trampoline code for kretprobes David Long
2016-04-27 18:53 ` David Long
2016-04-27 18:53 ` [PATCH v12 09/10] arm64: Add kernel return probes support (kretprobes) David Long
2016-04-27 18:53 ` David Long
2016-04-27 18:53 ` [PATCH v12 10/10] kprobes: Add arm64 case in kprobe example module David Long
2016-04-27 18:53 ` David Long
2016-05-17 9:57 ` Huang Shijie
2016-05-17 9:57 ` Huang Shijie
2016-05-17 10:24 ` Mark Brown
2016-05-17 10:24 ` Mark Brown
2016-05-18 1:31 ` Huang Shijie
2016-05-18 1:31 ` Huang Shijie
2016-05-11 15:33 ` [PATCH v12 00/10] arm64: Add kernel probes (kprobes) support James Morse
2016-05-11 15:33 ` James Morse
2016-05-12 2:26 ` Li Bin
2016-05-12 2:26 ` Li Bin
2016-05-13 20:02 ` David Long
2016-05-13 20:02 ` David Long
2016-05-18 2:24 ` Huang Shijie
2016-05-18 2:24 ` Huang Shijie
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=573E8FFB.3000107@linaro.org \
--to=dave.long@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/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.