Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86: fix text_poke

[Ingo Molnar]

* Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Woooow, just a sec here. I removed the atomicity test _because_ there 
> happen to be a case where it's safe to do non-atomic instruction 
> modification. If we do :
> 
> 1) replace the instruction first byte by a breakpoint, execute an
>   instruction bypass (see the immediate values patches for detail)
> 2) modify the instruction non-atomically
> 3) put back the original instruction first byte.
> 
> That's why I removed the BUG_ONs at the beginning of the function. 
> That's also why it's required to deal with page crossing.

but the code as-is is nonsensical. It checks for:

        BUG_ON(len > sizeof(long));

but then deals with page crossing...

it should also rename text_poke_early() to text_poke_core(), and call 
_that_ from text_poke() if core_kernel_text(). From that alone the whole 
poke_text() function would look a whole lot cleaner.

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/