Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] x86/static_call: Add inline static call implementation for x86-64

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 09:02:23AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > On Nov 29, 2018, at 8:50 AM, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > So no. Do *not* try to change %rsp on the stack in the bp handler.
> > Instead, I'd suggest:
> > 
> > - just restart the instruction (with the suggested "ptregs->rip --")
> > 
> > - to avoid any "oh, we're not making progress" issues, just fix the
> > instruction yourself to be the right call, by looking it up in the
> > "what needs to be fixed" tables.
> > 
> > No?

> Or do you think we can avoid the IPI while the int3 is there?

I'm thinking Linus is suggesting the #BP handler does the text write too
(as a competing store) and then sync_core() and restarts.

But I think that is broken, because then there is no telling what the
other CPUs will observe.