Re: [PATCH] x86: introduce push/pop macros which generate CFI_REL_OFFSET and CFI_RESTORE

[Andy Lutomirski]

On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Andy, please trim your replies.
>
> On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 11:25:39AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> I think that some users don't want the CFI_REL_OFFSET.
>
> Why? I thought those two annotations are independent? As you said:
>
> "IOW, one is to keep the stack frame tracking consistent and the other
> is to tell the unwinder about the register we just saved."
>
> Sounds to me like we want both...
>

Dumb example:

    pushq_cfi $__KERNEL_DS /* ss */

This doesn't save anything that the unwinder would care about.

Better example:

    pushq_cfi \child_rip /* rip */
    CFI_REL_OFFSET    rip,0

Doing this with a macro would need a fancier macro.

Then there's crap like:

    pushq_cfi %rdi
    SCHEDULE_USER
    popq_cfi %rdi

I would need to look a lot more carefully to figure out whether this
would need CFI_REL_OFFSET.

If we actually had a DWARF unwinder in the kernel, maybe we could have
real test cases :-/

--Andy
--
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/