linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
To: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Cc: Sachin Sant <sachinp@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] powerpc/code-patching: work around code patching verification in patching tests
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2021 11:39:18 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <cad41998-9f03-017a-3243-0efad14ea71a@csgroup.eu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1637922388.sidg5s6in4.astroid@bobo.none>



Le 26/11/2021 à 11:27, Nicholas Piggin a écrit :
> Excerpts from Christophe Leroy's message of November 26, 2021 4:34 pm:
>>
>>
>> Le 26/11/2021 à 04:22, Nicholas Piggin a écrit :
>>> Code patching tests patch the stack and (non-module) vmalloc space now,
>>> which falls afoul of the new address check.
>>>
>>> The stack patching can easily be fixed, but the vmalloc patching is more
>>> difficult. For now, add an ugly workaround to skip the check while the
>>> test code is running.
>>
>> This really looks hacky.
>>
>> To skip the test, you can call do_patch_instruction() instead of calling
>> patch_instruction().
> 
> And make a do_patch_branch function. I thought about it, and thought
> this is sligtly easier.
> 

Anyway, as reported by Sachin the ftrace code also trips in the new 
verification. So I have submitted a patch to revert to the previous 
level of verification.

Then we can fix all this properly without going through a temporary hack 
and activate the verification again once every caller is fixed.

I was not able to reproduce Sachin's problem on PPC32. Could it be 
specific to PPC64 ?

Christophe

      reply	other threads:[~2021-11-26 10:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-11-26  3:22 [PATCH 1/3] powerpc/code-patching: work around code patching verification in patching tests Nicholas Piggin
2021-11-26  3:22 ` [PATCH 2/3] powerpc/code-patching: warn on code patching failure Nicholas Piggin
2021-11-26  3:22 ` [PATCH 3/3] powerpc/code-patching: don't use the stack for code patching tests Nicholas Piggin
2021-11-26  6:34 ` [PATCH 1/3] powerpc/code-patching: work around code patching verification in " Christophe Leroy
2021-11-26 10:27   ` Nicholas Piggin
2021-11-26 10:39     ` Christophe Leroy [this message]

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=cad41998-9f03-017a-3243-0efad14ea71a@csgroup.eu \
    --to=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
    --cc=sachinp@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).