Re: [RFC PATCH v0 00/19] x86/insn: Add an insn_decode() API

[Borislav Petkov]

On Tue, Dec 01, 2020 at 02:21:45AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> Because it overruns the buffer. Maybe -E2BIG/ENODATA or any other
> error (except for -EINVAL) is OK :)

ENODATA it is. :)

And propagating that error value is easy because the err_out: labels are
all coming from the validate_next() error path so we basically know that
the buffer has ended.

./insn_sanity: Success: decoded and checked 10000 random instructions with 0 errors (seed:0x7bdfa56e)
insn buffer:
0x48 0xcf 0x48 0x83 0x90 0x90 0x90 0x90 0x90 0x90 0x90 0x90 0x90 0x90 0x90 
supplied buf size: 15, ret 0
supplied buf size: 2, ret 0
supplied buf size: 3, ret 0
supplied buf size: 4, ret 0
insn_decode: entry
insn_decode: will get_length
insn_get_immediate: getting immediate
insn_get_displacement: getting displacement
insn_get_sib: getting sib
insn_get_modrm: entry
insn_get_opcode: entry
insn_get_prefixes: entry, prefixes->got: 0
insn_get_prefixes: 1
insn_get_prefixes: REX
insn_get_prefixes: VEX
insn_get_prefixes: validate_next: 0
insn_get_prefixes: insn->next_byte: 0x7ffc211eb661, insn->end_kaddr: 0x7ffc211eb661
insn_get_prefixes: errored out
supplied buf size: 1, ret -61

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette