From: Anshuman Khandual <khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au
Cc: naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/2] Consolidate patch_instruction
Date: Tue, 16 May 2017 10:56:10 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <886e774c-c555-5547-2c03-22d611f2551f@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170516034913.21163-1-bsingharora@gmail.com>
On 05/16/2017 09:19 AM, Balbir Singh wrote:
> patch_instruction is enhanced in this RFC to support
> patching via a different virtual address (text_poke_area).
Why writing instruction directly into the address is not
sufficient and need to go through this virtual address ?
> The mapping of text_poke_area->addr is RW and not RWX.
> This way the mapping allows write for patching and then we tear
> down the mapping. The downside is that we introduce a spinlock
> which serializes our patching to one patch at a time.
So whats the benifits we get otherwise in this approach when
we are adding a new lock into the equation.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-05-16 5:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-05-16 3:49 [RFC 0/2] Consolidate patch_instruction Balbir Singh
2017-05-16 3:49 ` [RFC 1/2] powerpc/lib/code-patching: Enhance code patching Balbir Singh
2017-05-16 3:49 ` [RFC 2/2] powerpc/kprobes: Move kprobes over to patch_instruction Balbir Singh
2017-05-16 13:35 ` Naveen N. Rao
2017-05-17 1:40 ` Balbir Singh
2017-05-30 14:28 ` Naveen N. Rao
2017-05-16 5:26 ` Anshuman Khandual [this message]
2017-05-16 13:41 ` [RFC 0/2] Consolidate patch_instruction Naveen N. Rao
2017-05-17 1:23 ` Balbir Singh
2017-05-16 20:20 ` LEROY Christophe
2017-05-17 2:10 ` Balbir Singh
2017-05-17 7:04 ` LEROY Christophe
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=886e774c-c555-5547-2c03-22d611f2551f@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=bsingharora@gmail.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).