lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Mar]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v8 00/11] arm64: Branch Target Identification support
On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 12:42:26PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 09, 2020 at 09:05:05PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 06, 2020 at 10:27:29AM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>
> > > Does this series affect uprobes in any way? I.e. can you probe a landing
> > > pad?
>
> > You can't probe a landing pad, uprobes on landing pads will be silently
> > ignored so the program isn't disrupted, you just don't get the expected
> > trace from those uprobes. This isn't new with the BTI support since
> > the landing pads are generally pointer auth instructions, these already
> > can't be probed regardless of what's going on with this series. It's
> > already on the list to get sorted.
>
> Sorry, I realized thanks to Amit's off-list prompting that I was testing
> that I was verifying with the wrong kernel binary here (user error since
> it took me a while to sort out uprobes) so this isn't quite right - you
> can probe the landing pads with or without this series.

Can we not change aarch64_insn_is_nop() to actually return true only for
NOP and ignore everything else in the hint space? We tend to re-use the
hint instructions for new things in the architecture, so I'd rather
white-list what we know we can safely probe than black-listing only some
of the hint instructions.

I haven't assessed the effort of doing the above (probably not a lot)
but as a short-term workaround we could add the BTI and PAC hint
instructions to the aarch64_insn_is_nop() (though my preferred option is
the white-list one).

--
Catalin

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-03-11 17:29    [W:0.065 / U:2.376 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site