From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CDD2E53E0B; Thu, 15 Oct 2026 13:10:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1792069837; cv=none; b=KixgDJoCnF0TiuPfhAvGNe3RclKw4HMncLWpgzmNtAMIhU0NZqWhTZDWZnCjW28+qnNq8lV4T0e5Qbu7+X5F99N0iOOwU0FT27h2RWjNRjrH4mrHCa3jMa/dHahqXe0ls/vkOxREEcvHldJ81Szta8i3Z5BkAU4PosjJpVi06tU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1792069837; c=relaxed/simple; bh=sz4hzEZJLPdSVWQJ5xfTfuuVT3yRhnpOVKvUu1szxHI=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type: MIME-Version:Message-Id; b=teg9uk4bO+qWkyEQT4Iqtubr1FSibqe4mTHubtLNfzVKem6tJtUt9EBSk7yMxgEfOvrD5FlNdfZH37EroEMPXJDl9LVTEWqfnSZqF7ZTLWwUKC47IUMGObsGhGqSPxkVHq9da7yCQcOKv2Fr0PEbvA0I0MJ4B8zHaEojZSmpuq8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=dSgNKyB6; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="dSgNKyB6" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7F52E1F000C4; Thu, 15 Oct 2026 13:10:34 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1792069836; bh=SQFo5wC07ThRu0a3yHnNYmLfM6ZYz/KtYif9hkram5o=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=dSgNKyB6EpoRDOEK8z036qCP/tiQSqx+4QRnnSXT0QiGb9X6/m1ph2n8bdnx6M0ry KYywAriuDYE785XEva20qbcUQvTxELqpYVBpsZ8eMn4Nx/PUfxhnPDdDzQaCZym1Ro JOBi+Waom34zkhppl1bGlBwYXhzw7l+pPzyIks2OF99o+BvkQf0pHhqPJlKfQR178H Zkx7KPSGtLBq374Ln/fSDm0S6J2BfX6idfuZXCV9XdDE7c7r1YvH+nbtP5jM8+1roU n8lB7xdVCdPRxmjAvcw46tKyeuu90naP+x6t3xQ65Q5YvYGis1zwWuI+U+hFes0+8d su+sZXpQM4i/g== From: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) To: Xiaofeng Yuan Cc: Paul Walmsley , Palmer Dabbelt , Albert Ou , Alexandre Ghiti , Nam Cao , Naveen N Rao , "David S . Miller" , linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/2] riscv: kprobes: reject probes inside LR/SC sequences Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2026 22:10:32 +0900 X-Mailer: UndineD 0.1 In-Reply-To: <20261014094415.374-1-yuanxiaofeng@eswincomputing.com> References: 20260828091202.1124-1-yuanxiaofeng@eswincomputing.com <20261014094415.374-1-yuanxiaofeng@eswincomputing.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20261015131034.7F52E1F000C4@smtp.kernel.org> On Wed, 14 Oct 2026 17:44:13 +0800, Xiaofeng Yuan wrote: > A breakpoint trap taken in the middle of an LR/SC sequence clears the > load reservation, so an SC following the probed instruction always fails > and the enclosing retry loop re-enters the breakpoint, livelocking the > CPU. This series makes the RISC-V kprobes implementation reject probes > placed on an LR/SC instruction or between them, following arm64's > approach for its equivalent exclusive load/store instructions. > Please do NOT reply new version against the previous thread. It is not easy to find a new version in the message list. Thanks, -- Masami Hiramatsu (Google)