Re: [RFC] de-asmify the x86-64 system call slowpath

[Oleg Nesterov]

On 01/28, Al Viro wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 06:39:31PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 01/27, Al Viro wrote:
> > >
> > > Why is _TIF_UPROBE *not* a part
> > > of _TIF_DO_NOTIFY_MASK, for example?
> >
> > Yes, please see another email. That is why uprobe_deny_signal()
> > sets TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME along with TIF_UPROBE.
>
> *grumble* Can it end up modifying *regs?  From very cursory reading of
> kernel/events/uprobe.c it seems to do so, so we probably want to leave
> via iretq if that has hit, right?

But we do this anyway, restore_args path does iretq?

I mean, uprobe_notify_resume() is called from do_notify_resume(), it
should be fine to modify*regs there?

Oleg.

--
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/