From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933141AbdBQLBT (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Feb 2017 06:01:19 -0500 Received: from smarthost03d.mail.zen.net.uk ([212.23.1.23]:56762 "EHLO smarthost03d.mail.zen.net.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755335AbdBQLBS (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Feb 2017 06:01:18 -0500 Message-ID: <1487329270.3113.5.camel@linaro.org> Subject: Re: [BUGFIX PATCH V2 0/3] kprobes/arm: Improve kprobes implementation on arm From: "Jon Medhurst (Tixy)" To: Masami Hiramatsu , Russell King Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra , Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , "H . Peter Anvin" , Wang Nan , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , "David A . Long" , Sandeepa Prabhu , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 11:01:10 +0000 In-Reply-To: <148711844284.5814.10387227824715177703.stgit@devbox> References: <148711844284.5814.10387227824715177703.stgit@devbox> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.22.4-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-smarthost03d-IP: [82.69.122.217] Feedback-ID: 82.69.122.217 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2017-02-15 at 09:27 +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > Hi, > > Here is the 2nd version of the patches which improve kprobe > on arm implementation (a kind of bugfix). Version 1 is here; > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/2/13/538 > > In this version I didn't update the code, just update the > patch description according to Tixy's comment and add his Ack. > > Thank you, > > --- > > Masami Hiramatsu (3): > kprobes/arm: Allow to handle reentered kprobe on single-stepping > kprobes/arm: Skip single-stepping in recursing path if possible > kprobes/arm: Fix the return address of multiple kretprobes > Thanks for doing these. Am I correct in assuming we don't need to consider these fixes urgent or critical? Only the first looks like it could be serious, and the x86 fix for that is 3 years old and ARM has gone without it all this time. So I'm guessing it's fine to wait for the normal development process and deal with it after the about to open merge window is completed? If so, I propose that I put the patches in a branch for Russell to pull later (unless he pipes up with objections or says otherwise). Meantime I'll investigate the kprobes test failures I see (which actually looks like cache/TLB issues and not test code problems after all). BTW, I added theĀ ARM kernel list to the CC. I spotted you didn't add it to you patch postings, which means people interested in ARM (other than Russell) wouldn't have seen them. Thanks -- Tixy