Re: [PATCH v6 3.2-rc1 28/28] uprobes: introduceUTASK_SSTEP_TRAPPED logic

[Srikar Dronamraju]

> >
> > +void __weak abort_xol(struct pt_regs *regs, struct uprobe_task *utask)
> > +{
> > +	set_instruction_pointer(regs, utask->vaddr);
> > +}
> 
> OK, this is fine on 32bit. But X86_64 should also handle
> UPROBES_FIX_RIP_AX/CX?
> 
> IOW, shouldn't we also do
> 
> 	if (uprobe->fixups & UPROBES_FIX_RIP_AX)
> 		regs->ax = tskinfo->saved_scratch_register;
> 	else if (uprobe->fixups & UPROBES_FIX_RIP_CX)
> 		regs->cx = tskinfo->saved_scratch_register;
> 
> on 64bit?

Yes, we should be doing this on x86_64. Since abort_xol is a weak
function, I will have x86_64 specific abort_xol.

-- 
Thanks and Regards
Srikar

--
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/