Re: [PATCH 3/5] uprobes: Fix UPROBE_SKIP_SSTEP checks in handle_swbp()

[Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>]

On 09/17, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
>
> * Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> [2012-09-15 17:01:20]:
>
> > Off-topic question... I am trying to understand if arch_uprobe_skip_sstep()
> > is correct on x86.
> >
> > It doesn't update regs->ip.
>
> Right. we need to adjust for the size of the instruction.
>
> > Probably this is fine, at least this is
> > fine if it finds "nop" eventually. But I can't undestand what
> > "0x66* { 0x90 | 0x0f 0x1f | 0x0f 0x19 | 0x87 0xc0 }" means.
> > OK, 0x66 and 0x90 are clear. But, say, 0x0f 0x1f ?
>
> we skip is 0x66 ..0x66 0x0f 0x1f
>
> So we have a check
> if (i == (MAX_UINSN_BYTES - 1))
>
> so this ensures that we are consider 0x0f 0x1f as nop if and only if
> they are at the end and preceeded by 0x66.

Hmm. How so? The code does

	if (i == (MAX_UINSN_BYTES - 1))
		break;

	if ((auprobe->insn[i] == 0x0f) && (auprobe->insn[i+1] == 0x1f))
		return true;


So, afaics, if the intent was to skip 1f0f at the end only, it should do

	if (i == (MAX_UINSN_BYTES - 1)) {
		if ((auprobe->insn[i] == 0x0f) && (auprobe->insn[i+1] == 0x1f))
			return true;
		...
	}

"and preceeded by 0x66" above doesn't look true too, perhaps you
meant "may be preceeded by 0x66".

> So are you suggesting extending the list of nops or is it that we are
> considering non nop instructions as nops?

No, I am trying to understand which insns arch_skip tries to skip.
In particular, what "0x0f 0x1f" means.

> > I compiled this program
> >
> > 	int main(void)
> > 	{
> > 		asm volatile (".word 0x1f0f");
> > 		return 0;
> > 	}
> >
> > and objdump reports:
> >
> > 	000000000040047c <main>:
> > 	  40047c:       0f 1f 31                nopl   (%rcx)
>
> Current uprobes code wouldnt skip the above insn because it has 31
> following it.

See above.

And again, could you explain which insn has 1f0f (at the end or not) ?
IOW, what we are trying to skip?

Oleg.