From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: viktor.rosendahl@nokia.com (Viktor Rosendahl) Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 19:46:31 +0300 Subject: [PATCH] Reject kprobes when Rn==15 and writeback is set In-Reply-To: <1301500340.2488.127.camel@computer2.home> References: <1301492550-16747-1-git-send-email-viktor.rosendahl@nokia.com> <1301500340.2488.127.camel@computer2.home> Message-ID: <4D935E67.8060203@nokia.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 03/30/2011 06:52 PM, ext Tixy wrote: > If we start littering the code with all these extra checks we risk > introducing bugs and making the code more difficult to maintain. > > In my opinion we should not add any extra code to handle instructions > combinations that the ARM ARM says are UNPREDICTABLE, or have fields > which are SBZ/SBO. The toolchain shouldn't ever generate these bad > instructions in which case the extra kprobes code is redundant. > I see your point. I guess we can decide to not care about those unpredictable cases, unless someone can come up with some decoding & checking code that covers all the cases and is easy to understand and maintain. best regards, Viktor