2016-02-17 2:11 GMT+09:00 Catalin Marinas <[email protected]>: > On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 04:44:38AM +0000, EunTaik Lee wrote: >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c b/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c >> index 19211c4..a5ebb99 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c >> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c >> @@ -371,6 +371,14 @@ static int __kprobes do_translation_fault(unsigned long >> addr, >> return 0; >> } >> >> +static int __kprobes do_alignment_fault(unsigned long addr, >> + unsigned int esr, >> + struct pt_regs *regs) >> +{ >> + do_bad_area(addr, esr, regs); >> + return 0; >> +} >> + >> /* >> * This abort handler always returns "fault". >> */ >> @@ -418,7 +426,7 @@ static struct fault_info { >> { do_bad, SIGBUS, 0, "synchronous parity >> error (translation table walk" }, >> { do_bad, SIGBUS, 0, "synchronous parity >> error (translation table walk" }, >> { do_bad, SIGBUS, 0, "unknown 32" >> }, >> - { do_bad, SIGBUS, BUS_ADRALN, "alignment fault" >> }, >> + { do_alignment_fault, SIGBUS, BUS_ADRALN, "alignment fault" >> }, > > Do you need a new function, can you not just add do_bad_area in the > fault_info array?
I made a new function since do_bad_area currently does not return any value. Should I just make it return an integer instead of making a new function for the unaligned fault? Euntaik
