From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 596ACC433E1 for ; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 15:26:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DEDD2075E for ; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 15:26:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="cDsq/X5V" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727062AbgHZP0h (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Aug 2020 11:26:37 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:39348 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726947AbgHZP0g (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Aug 2020 11:26:36 -0400 Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [IPv6:2001:8b0:10b:1231::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9493CC061574; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 08:26:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=+kbSD2yR9v2pWhwpsyiZqxkY0BVg0p/LK9dRxQLDYOQ=; b=cDsq/X5VEuKMenCLWm0q6T9jFP +BRjLwIXzwkTQriFPNTFD+XHjLROecLv6xlo2AVtE7RWIVb2VE6ZkUeVjQFEd6zQ0L6lltp/diJFI JK9K1IesrNG+lmPgJ8muvGVY8OsfoVAEcDc+BOfNagSbl+R8y9FtRKqeg4lKS21IUN6xLZ5QpeK+I cDXcvwgXjEq8PFwUBRJk5iZLmvobXSE62wlTXCunUYbd5mXv3DGAWZURMJlmDqTEdlYbJFSoxSwaR qeSLkbYm9Ux/t8vAAJzoKeecBSAKQG6D+tusUuxDWthKo9W9jA/jMelcb2tf1E6Ka/YmWdVrB+9W7 ENW1KRRA==; Received: from j217100.upc-j.chello.nl ([24.132.217.100] helo=noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtpsa (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kAxJY-0004Pl-Tp; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 15:26:17 +0000 Received: from hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net (hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net [192.168.1.225]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8D7D9303A02; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 17:26:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: by hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4B1FC2BFF50C3; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 17:26:12 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 17:26:12 +0200 From: peterz@infradead.org To: Masami Hiramatsu Cc: Eddy Wu , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, "David S . Miller" , Steven Rostedt , Ingo Molnar , "Naveen N . Rao" , Anil S Keshavamurthy , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 03/14] arm: kprobes: Use generic kretprobe trampoline handler Message-ID: <20200826152612.GX2674@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <159844957216.510284.17683703701627367133.stgit@devnote2> <159844960343.510284.15315372011917043979.stgit@devnote2> <20200826140852.GG1362448@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20200826141025.GU35926@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20200827000405.60aa815dbb6f1417dc9da867@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200827000405.60aa815dbb6f1417dc9da867@kernel.org> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 12:04:05AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > Argh, I replied to the wrong variant, I mean the one that uses > > kernel_stack_pointer(regs). > > Would you mean using kernel_stack_pointer() for the frame_pointer? > Some arch will be OK, but others can not get the framepointer by that. > (that is because the stack layout is different on the function prologue > and returned address, e.g. x86...) Yeah, I noticed :/ I was hoping to avoid some further duplication, but they're all sublty different.