Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 6 Jun 2017 13:58:42 +0200 | From | Borislav Petkov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v7 07/26] x86/insn-eval: Do not BUG on invalid register type |
| |
On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 11:06:58PM -0700, Ricardo Neri wrote: > I agree that insn-eval reads somewhat funny. I did not want to go with > insn-dec.c as insn.c, in my opinion, already decodes the instruction > (i.e., it finds prefixes, opcodes, ModRM, SIB and displacement bytes). > In insn-eval.c I simply take those decoded parameters and evaluate them > to obtain the values they contain (e.g., a specific memory location). > Perhaps, insn-resolve.c could be a better name? Or maybe isnn-operands?
So actually I'm gravitating towards calling all that instruction "massaging" code with a single prefix to denote this comes from the insn decoder/handler/whatever...
I.e.,
"insn-decoder: x86: invalid register type"
or
"inat: x86: invalid register type"
or something to that effect.
I mean, If we're going to grow our own - as we do, apparently - maybe it all should be a separate entity with its proper name.
Hmm.
-- Regards/Gruss, Boris.
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) --
| |